BOARD OF CONTRACT APPEALS
   U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
   WASHINGTON, DC  20401

In the Matter of            )
                            )
the Appeal of               )
                            )
MORENO ENTERPRISES, INC.    )      Docket No. GPOBCA 10-97
Jacket No. 565-036          )
Purchase Order 8756-S       )

DECISION AND ORDER DISMISSING APPEAL UNDER
RULE 31 FOR FAILURE TO PROSECUTE

On June 23, 1998, pursuant to Rule 31 of the Board Rules, the
Board issued a Rule to Show Cause Why Appeal Should Not be
Dismissed for Failure to Prosecute (Rule to Show Cause),
directing the Appellant to state its reasons for not complying
with the requirements of the Board Rules, and in particular, by
not submitting its Rule 6(a) Complaint, although 13 months had
elapsed since it received the Board's docketing notice on May 19,
1997.
The Rule to Show Cause directed the Appellant to submit a written
response to the Board within fifteen (15) days from its receipt,
showing such cause as it may have as to why the appeal should not
be dismissed with prejudice for failure to prosecute.  The Board
sent the Rule to Show Cause by certified mail to the Appellant at
its address of record:

Mr. Robert Moreno, President,
Moreno Enterprises, Inc.
1015 Pittsburg Avenue
Baton Rouge, LA  70802-4237

On July 23, 1998, however, the Rule to Show Cause was returned to
the Board after the U.S. Postal Service made two unsuccessful
attempts to deliver it.  The Board then called the Appellant's
office to verify its address.  The Board was given a new address,
955 Choctaw Drive, Baton Rouge, LA 70805.  Two more attempts to
serve the Rule to Show Cause on the Appellant at its new address
was made by the Board.  These attempts were equally unavailing,
and the letters were returned to the Board on August 10, 1998 and
September 11, 1998, respectively, as unclaimed.
Rule 31 allows the Board to dismiss an appeal whenever the record
discloses, inter alia, that a party has:  (1) failed to file
documents required by the rules; (2) respond to the Board's
notices or correspondence; or (3) otherwise indicates an
intention not to continue the orderly prosecution or defense of
an appeal.  Board Rules, Rule 31.  Based on the foregoing facts,
it is clear to the Board that dismissal is justified in this case
on one or more of those grounds.  That is, the record in this
appeal amply demonstrates that the Appellant has ignored the
Board's rules and directives with respect to pleadings, has
failed to respond to the Board's correspondence, and has
otherwise indicated an intention not to continue the orderly
prosecution of its appeal.  No other conclusion is warranted by
its failure to file a timely Complaint or respond to the Rule to
Show Cause.  See Rosemark, GPOBCA 30-90 (April 22, 1994), slip
op. at 4, 1994 WL 275076; Bedrock Printing Company, GPOBCA 05-91
(April 10, 1992), slip op. at 5-6 (citing David M. Noe, AGBCA No.
88-155-1, 89-1 BCA  21,560; Leonard V. West, PSBCA No. 1443,
86-3 BCA 19,060).

The Board has attempted to give the Appellant an opportunity
under 31 of the Board Rules to show cause why its appeal should
not be dismissed for failure to prosecute.  Through no fault of
the Board's, the Appellant has not responded to the Rule to Show
Cause in this case.  Consequently, the Appellant has not made a
showing that the appeal should not be dismissed for failure to
prosecute.  Therefore, the appeal is DISMISSED with prejudice for
failure to prosecute.
It is so Ordered.


September 14, 1998                     RONALD BERGER
Ad Hoc Chairman