CBCA 5524

DENIED: March 3, 2017 CBCA 5524 SERVITODO LLC, Appellant, v. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, Respondent. William J. Acuff, Management Officer of ServiTodo LLC, Atlanta, GA, appearing for Appellant. Scott C. Briles, Office of the General Counsel, Department of Health and Human Services, Atlanta, GA, counsel for Respondent. Before Board Judges GOODMAN, SHERIDAN, and CHADWICK. GOODMAN, Board Judge. Appellant, ServiTodo LLC (appellant or ServiTodo), filed this appeal on October 24, 2016, from a final decision dated October 12, 2016, issued by a contracting officer of respondent, Department of Health and Human Services (HHS or respondent), denying appellant’s claim for breach of four contracts (the four contracts) between appellant and respondent. Respondent has filed a motion to dismiss this appeal pursuant to CBCA Rule 8 (48 CFR 6101.8 (2015)), asserting that all claims and appeals related to the four contracts have been previously settled and released pursuant to a settlement agreement between the parties that resolved five prior appeals by appellant at this Board and released the claim which is the subject of the instant appeal. We treat the motion as one for summary relief, grant the motion, and deny the appeal. CBCA 5524 2 Background Appellant completed performance of each of the four contracts before it submitted the claim that underlies this appeal to the contracting officer. Contract no. 200-2011-F-38848 had a performance period of April 8, 2011, through April 7, 2012, and a total value of $249,428.96. Contract no. 200-2012-M-51078 had a performance period from September 1, 2012, through August 31, 2013, and a total value $93,328.31. Contract no. 200-2011-41281 had a base period of September 1, 2011, through August 31, 2012, with four option periods. The value of the base period was $562,841.60. Option period 4 was not exercised, and contract performance ended August 31, 2015. Contract no. 200-2011-39879 (sometimes referred to herein as contract 39879) had a base period from July 15, 2011, through July 14, 2012, with four option periods. The total value of the base plus option periods was $1,523,238.32. Option periods 3 and 4 were removed by a bilateral modification. Contract performance ended July 14, 2014. Before filing the instant appeal, appellant had filed seven appeals–CBCA 4777, 4820, 4910, 4911, 4933, 4979, and 5065–in June through November 2015. Appellant was represented in all proceedings before the Board by its management officer, William Acuff, who signed all filings and personally appeared before the Board in a hearing and alternative dispute resolution (ADR) proceedings.1 CBCA 4777 was an appeal from the denial of a claim in the amount of $57,264, arising from contract no. 200-2012-M-51078, which was granted in part in the amount of $15,290. ServiTodo LLC v. Department of Health and Human Services, CBCA 4777, 15-1 BCA ¶ 36,161. CBCA 4910 was an appeal from the denial of a claim arising from 1 Mr. Acuff filed an eighty-eight page declaration (Declaration of William Acuff (December 20, 2016) in support of his opposition to respondent’s motion to dismiss, in which he recites in detail his preparation of the claims and participation in the proceedings in the seven prior appeals. The Declaration of William Acuff also discusses the preparation and submission of a claim dated October 7, 2016 (the claim or instant claim) which is the subject of the instant appeal. A substantial portion of that claim is duplicated in that declaration, and appellant has also designated the claim as its complaint in this appeal. CBCA 5524 3 contract no. 200-2011-39879. Respondent paid the claim in substantial part, and the appeal was withdrawn by appellant and then dismissed with prejudice by the Board on December 22, 2015. The parties agreed to attempt to resolve the remaining five appeals (the five appeals) by ADR. CBCA 4820 and 4979 were related to claims arising from contract no. 200-2011-41281. CBCA 4011, 4933, and 5065 were related to claims arising from contract no. 200-2011-39879.2 Pursuant to the Board’s ADR procedures, a board judge was appointed as ADR neutral to aid the parties in reaching a settlement. An ADR proceeding was initiated and concluded on November 17, 2015, without the appeals being resolved.