Quality Trust Inc.

ARMED SERVICES BOARD OF CONTRACT APPEALS

Appeal of-- )

)

Quality Trust Inc. ) ASBCA No. 59983

)

Under Contract No. W912P6-15-C-0002 )

APPEARANCE FOR THE APPELLANT: Mr. Lawrence M. Ruiz

President

APPEARANCES FOR THE GOVERNMENT: Thomas H. Gourlay, Jr., Esq.

Engineer Chief Trial Attorney

Kimberly J. Sabo, Esq.

Engineer District Counsel

U.S. Army Engineer District, Chicago

OPINION BY ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGE PROUTY

ON APPELLANT'S MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION

Before the Board is appellant Quality Trust Inc.'s (Quality's) timely motion for

reconsideration of our earlier entry of summary judgment against its appeal of the

contracting officer's decision to terminate its contract for default. Quality Trust Inc.,

ASBCA No. 59983, 16-1BCAii36,368. We deny the motion.

A motion for reconsideration is not the place to present arguments previously made

and rejected. "[W]here litigants have once battled for the court's decision, they should

neither be required, nor without good reason permitted, to battle for it again. Motions for

reconsideration do not afford litigants the opportunity to take a 'second bite at the apple'

or to advance arguments that properly should have been presented in an earlier

proceeding." Dixon v. Shinseki, 741F.3d1367, 1378 (Fed. Cir. 2014) (citations omitted);

see also Avant Assessment, LLC, ASBCA No. 58867, 15-1BCAii36,137 at 176,386.

Here, we earlier granted the government's motion for summary judgment because

Quality had failed to obtain contractually-required performance and payment bonds and,

despite attempting to assign blame to multiple other actors, had presented no evidence

excusing its own lack of performance. Quality's motion for reconsideration appears to

be a rehash of its previous, unsupported argument, that the government was somehow

responsible for its failure to obtain the required bonds. And its argument on

reconsideration remains equally unsupported. As discussed above, we will not disturb an

earlier decision merely because, on reconsideration, the losing side presents the same

argument as before, but with more intensity.

1

For the reasons stated herein, we deny Quality's motion for reconsideration of our

denial of ASBCA No. 59983.

Dated: 29 June 2016

J. REID PROUTY

Administrative Judge

Armed Services Board

of Contract Appeals

I concur I concur

Administrative Judge

Vice Chairman

Armed Services Board

of Contract Appeals

I certify that the foregoing is a true copy of the Opinion and Decision of the

Armed Services Board of Contract Appeals in ASBCA No. 59983, Appeal of Quality

Trust Inc., rendered in conformance with the Board's Charter.

Dated:

JEFFREY D. GARDIN

Recorder, Armed Services

Board of Contract Appeals

2