CBCA 7044
Board: CBCA
Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs
Appellant: Brandon Staffing Solutions LLC
Date: 2022-02-08
Outcome: dismissed
DISMISSED FOR FAILURE TO PROSECUTE: February 8, 2022
CBCA 7044
BRANDON STAFFING SOLUTIONS LLC,
Appellant,
v.
DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS,
Respondent.
Richard Harris, CEO of Brandon Staffing Solutions LLC, Wylie, TX, appearing for
Appellant.
Natica Chapman Neely, Office of General Counsel, Department of Veterans Affairs,
Jackson, MS, counsel for Respondent.
Before Board Judges KULLBERG, SULLIVAN, and OâROURKE.
KULLBERG, Board Judge.
The Government has requested that the Board dismiss this appeal for failure to
prosecute. For the reasons stated below, the Board dismisses this appeal for failure to
prosecute.
Background
The Board docketed this appeal on February 11, 2021, and subsequently issued an
order that set due dates for the initial submission of pleadings and exhibits. On March 10,
2021, the parties jointly requested an extension of time for submission of pleadings and
exhibits, which the Board granted. Appellant failed to submit its complaint as ordered, and
CBCA 7044 2
the Board issued an order on April 19, 2021, that directed appellant to submit its complaint.
After receiving no timely response, the Board again ordered appellant on June 8, 2021, to
submit its complaint. Appellant submitted its complaint on June 15, 2021.
By order dated June 30, 2021, the Board directed the parties to submit a joint status
report on or before September 13, 2021, that would set forth proposed hearing dates and a
schedule for discovery. On September 13, 2021, the Government advised the Board that it
had been unable to contact appellant in order to propose a joint status report, and the
Government proposed its own schedule for discovery and a hearing. In its order dated
September 20, 2021, the Board again directed the parties to confer and submit a joint status
report.
On October 4, 2021, the Government filed a request that the Board dismiss this appeal
for failure to prosecute. The Government submitted documentary evidence of repeated
unsuccessful efforts to communicate with appellant by email and telephone. On October 5,
2021, the Board ordered appellant to respond to the Governmentâs motion but received no
response. By order dated November 10, 2021, the Board again directed appellant to respond
to the Governmentâs motion. Receiving no response, the Board issued an order to appellant
on January 4, 2022, to show cause why this appeal should not be dismissed for failure to
prosecute. Appellant has not filed a response to the Boardâs order to show cause, and the due
date for responding has passed. All reasonable efforts to contact appellant have been to no
avail.
Discussion
The issue before the Board is whether appellantâs consistent failure to respond to
orders is sufficient grounds to dismiss this appeal for failure to prosecute. The Boardâs rules
provide the following:
If a party or its representative, attorney, expert, or consultant fails to comply
with any direction or order of the Board . . . the Board may make such orders
as are just, including the imposition of appropriate sanctions. Sanctions may
include, but are not limited to:
....
(6) Dismissing the case or any part thereof.
Rule 35 (48 CFR 6101.35(b) (2020)). This Board has recognized that âdismissal for failure
to prosecute is appropriate when an appellant is unresponsive to an order requiring action by
the appellant.â Persaud Cos. v. General Services Administration, CBCA 3179, 14-1 BCA
CBCA 7044 3
¶ 35,547. âAs this Board has held, this authority is reserved for situations âwhere parties
have repeatedly failed to comply with the tribunalâs orders.ââ Elite Quality Services, LLC
v. Department of Commerce, CBCA 5050, 16-1 BCA ¶ 36,269 (quoting Medtek, Inc. v.
Department of Veteran Affairs, CBCA 1544, 09-2 BCA ¶ 34,285). Appellant has repeatedly
failed to respond to the Boardâs orders in spite of having been afforded ample opportunity
to do so. Dismissal is the appropriate sanction in this case.
Decision
The appeal is DISMISSED FOR FAILURE TO PROSECUTE.
H. Chuck Kullberg
H. CHUCK KULLBERG
Board Judge
We concur:
Marian E. Sullivan Kathleen J. OâRourke
MARIAN E.