CBCA 8423

DISMISSED FOR LACK OF JURISDICTION: May 27, 2025 CBCA 8423 5 STONES INTELLIGENCE, INC., Appellant, v. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Respondent. Brian J. Talay, Chief Executive Officer of 5 Stones intelligence, Inc., Cleveland, TN, appearing for Appellant; and Jason N. Workmaster and Elissa B. Harwood of Miller & Chevalier Chartered, Washington, D.C., counsel for Appellant.1 John J. Bowers and Laura D. Mayberry, Office of General Counsel, Justice Management Division, Department of Justice, Washington, DC, counsel for Respondent. Before Board Judges LESTER, SHERIDAN, and KULLBERG. LESTER, Board Judge. 1 Until May 23, 2025, appellant’s Chief Executive Officer, Brian J. Talay, served as appellant’s sole representative in this appeal, and Mr. Talay filed the two motions to dismiss discussed in this decision. Mr. Workmaster and Ms. Harwood filed entries of appearance on appellant’s behalf on May 23, along with a motion on behalf of both parties to stay all pending deadlines until the parties’ motion to dismiss is resolved. Because Mr. Talay prepared the motions to dismiss, we have included him in the list of appellant’s party representatives. The parties’ May 23 motion to stay deadlines is denied as moot. CBCA 8423 2 The parties filed a joint motion with the Board seeking dismissal of this appeal “for lack of jurisdiction without prejudice.”2 Originally, the parties did not identify any basis for believing that the Board lacks jurisdiction. In response to the Board’s prompting, the parties filed a revised motion in which they indicated, contrary to representations in the notice of appeal, that appellant, 5 Stones intelligence, Inc. (5Si), has never submitted a certified claim for the money that it is seeking here and that the contracting officer never issued a final decision on such a claim. Having reviewed that stipulation and the materials in the record, we grant the parties’ joint request to dismiss this appeal for lack of jurisdiction. Background On April 30, 2025, the Clerk of the Board docketed a notice of appeal in which 5Si alleged that it was appealing “the decision of [the Department of Justice (DOJ)] contracting officer” arising under contract no. DJJ16PSSV2670, a contract under which 5Si was allegedly providing services to support DOJ’s Organized Crime Drug Enforcement Task Force (OCDETF). In its notice of appeal, 5Si explained the basis of its claim as follows: In the final months of the eight year [Asset Forfeiture Investigative Support Services (AFISS)] contract and Task Order with OCDETF, [5Si] was provided a final Mod[ification] of funding for the OCDETF Task Order in the amount of $749,865.99. Given the length of the contract (8+ years), [5Si] requested a meeting with the OCDETF Unit Chief . . . for the specific purpose of determining the remaining funding on the Task Order, to include any unused funding from previous periods. During that zoom meeting we were told . . . of a specific amount of funding remaining ($948,471.93). Immediately following this meeting [the Unit Chief] sent an email (attached) articulating the same amount of remaining funding ($948,471.93). The DOJ Contracting Officer was copied on this and all programmatic email correspondence. [5Si] executed exactly to this agreed upon amount. The services were performed, received and accepted by the Government and invoiced, however our invoice was rejected stating we went over available funding. During a subsequent call, it was stated by the [contracting officer] that [the Unit Chief’s] email misstated the amount of remaining funding. It was also discussed that, given this error by the Government, . . . either OCDETF or DOJ could pursue a “Ratification” process to pay the remaining invoice. A 2 “Any dismissal for lack of jurisdiction is, by necessity, without prejudice.” SRA International, Inc. v. Department of State, CBCA 6563, et al., 20-1 BCA ¶ 37,543, at 182,314 n.1. CBCA 8423 3 subsequent email from the DOJ [contracting officer] . . . stated that OCDETF would not pursue a Ratification, but that DOJ [Asset Forfeiture Management Staff (AFMS)] will possibly submit for OCDETF.