CBCA 6265

DENIED: October 4, 2021 CBCA 6265, 6273, 6274, 6275, 6276, 6277, 6278, 6280, 6281, 6282, 6283, 6288, 6342, 6343, 6344 CARMAZZI GLOBAL SOLUTIONS, INC., Appellant, v. SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION, Respondent. Timothy J. Turner, Jonathan D. Perrone, Joseph Whitcomb, and David Tscheschke of Whitcomb, Selinsky, P.C., Denver, CO, counsel for Appellant. Dorothy M. Guy, Brandon Dell’Aglio, Tal Kedem, and Alice M. Somers, Office of the General Counsel, Social Security Administration, Baltimore, MD, counsel for Respondent. Before Board Judges BEARDSLEY (Chair), LESTER, and VERGILIO. VERGILIO, Board Judge. These fifteen cases involve contracts and task orders between Carmazzi Global Solutions, Inc. (contractor) and the respondent, the Social Security Administration (agency), that the agency terminated for cause. The contractor challenges the terminations. In a different set of three parallel, representative cases, the Board granted an agency motion for summary judgment and denied those appeals, concluding that the record demonstrated that the agency justified each termination for cause and the contractor failed to provide potential facts to support its contention that its failures to perform were excused under the contracts. Carmazzi Global Solutions, Inc. v. Social Security Administration, CBCA 6264, et al., 20-1 CBCA 6265, 6273, 6274, 6275, 6276, 6277, 6278, 2 6280, 6281, 6282, 6283, 6288, 6342, 6343, 6344 BCA ¶ 37,670. The agency moves for summary judgment in these cases. In opposing the motion, the contractor acknowledges that it failed to perform but maintains that summary judgment is inappropriate. The background enumerates material facts not in dispute, with the contractor acknowledging its failures to perform. The contractor has not presented credible support for its assertion that its failures to perform were excusable under each contract. Mere allegations are insufficient. Although the contractor misrepresents actions and occurrences during these appeals at the Board, that constitutes but an aside to its failure to meet its burden of proof at this stage. Further discovery is not warranted for the contractor to identify information that it must possess to support its basic theories of relief; the contractor has not marshaled the facts and law to avoid summary judgment. The Board grants the motion by the agency, denies these appeals, and upholds the terminations for cause. Background The agency awarded multiple commercial item contracts and issued task orders thereunder to the contractor to provide court reporters at disability appeal hearings before administrative law judges. At issue here are fifteen contracts and related task orders for various cities or areas. After a transition period under each contract, the contractor was obligated to provide 100% coverage for hearings and provide assurances ahead of each hearing that a reporter would be present. The contractor failed to provide reporters under each of the fifteen contracts, before, during, and after the agency had identified actual deficiencies and issued notices to cure and to show cause. The agency found the contractor in default of each contract and task order. The contractor does not dispute these basic facts. The contracts contained a Termination for Cause clause, 48 CFR 52.212-4(m) (2018), that permitted the agency to terminate each contract or task order if the contractor was in default: (m) Termination for cause. The Government may terminate this contract, or any part hereof, for cause in the event of any default by the Contractor, or if the Contractor fails to comply with any contract terms and conditions, or fails to provide the Government, upon request, with adequate assurances of future performance. In the event of termination for cause, the Government shall not be liable to the Contractor for any amount for supplies or services not accepted, and the Contractor shall be liable to the Government for any and all rights and remedies provided by law.