BOARD OF CONTRACT APPEALS U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE WASHINGTON, DC 20401 In the Matter of ) ) the Appeal of ) ) GRAPHIC IMAGE, INC. ) Docket No. GPO BCA 42-92 Program 2703-S ) Purchase Order K-0106 ) Print Orders 70000, 70007 thru 70017 ) DECISION AND ORDER DISMISSING APPEAL By Notice of Appeal dated October 20, 1992, Graphic Image, Inc. (Appellant or Contractor), 561 Boston Post Road, Milford, Connecticut 06460, appealed the July 22, 1992, final decision of Contracting Officer Richard W. Wildbrett, of the U.S. Government Printing Office's (Respondent or GPO), Dallas Regional Printing Procurement Office, United States Courthouse and Federal Office Building, 1100 Commerce Street, Room 304, Dallas, Texas 75242, terminating the Appellant's contract, identified as Program 2703-S, Purchase Order K-0106, Print Orders 70000, and 70007 through 70017, for default. GPO Instruction 110.12, Subject: Board of Contract Appeals Rules of Practice and Procedure, dated September 17, 1984, Rules 1(a), 2 (Board Rules). The appeal was docketed by the Board on October 30, 1992. Board Rules, Rule 3. By letter the same date, the Board notified the Appellant that its appeal had been docketed and provided it with a copy of the Board Rules. Id. Among other things, the Board's letter specifically directed the Contractor's attention to Rule 6(a) of the Board Rules, which requires that within 30 days after receipt of the notice of docketing the appeal, the Appellant shall file with the Board an original and two (2) copies of a Complaint containing the information described in that rule. Board Rules, Rule 6(a). On March 5, 1993, Counsel for GPO filed Respondent's Motion to Dismiss (Motion) with the Board seeking dismissal of this case on the ground that the Contractor had abandoned its appeal. The Motion was based, inter alia, on the ground that the Appellant had not submitted its Rule 6(a) Complaint, even though five (5) months had elapsed since the Contractor had received the Board's notice of docketing. A copy of the Motion was simultaneously served on the Appellant. Board Rules, Rule 16. On March 24, 1993, the Board contacted the Appellant by telephone to inquire about the status of this case, and in particular to ascertain its position on the Motion. During this conversation, the Contractor informed the Board that it could not locate the docketing letter, and asked for another copy of the letter along with the Board Rules. The Appellant further stated that it had not abandoned the appeal and would file its Complaint with the Board, along with a response to the Motion, immediately upon receipt of the docketing letter and the Board Rules. Accordingly, on March 25, 1993, the Board sent another copy of the docketing letter and the Board Rules to the Contractor by facsimile transmission. However, the Appellant never filed a Complaint or its response to the Motion. After ten (10) months had elapsed, on January 27, 1994, the Board telephoned the Appellant again, and asked about the status of this case. Specifically, the Board wanted to know when it could expect the Complaint and a reply to the Motion. The Contractor said it would submit those documents within three (3) days; i.e., by the end of January 1994. However, no Complaint or response to the Motion was received by the Board within the promised time. Therefore, on March 28, 1994, the Board, exercising its authority under Rule 31 of the Board Rules, issued a Rule To Show Cause Why Appeal Should Not Be Dismissed For Failure To Prosecute (Rule to Show Cause), and sent it to the Appellant by certified mail.1 Board Rules, Rule 31. In the Rule to Show Cause, the Board specifically noted that, as indicated in the appeal record, the Board's originally docketing letter along with the Board Rules, had been received by the Appellant on November 3, 1992. Rule to Show Cause, p. 3. Furthermore, in response to the Contractor's claim that it could not locate the docketing letter, the Board sent second copies of letter and the Board Rules to the Appellant on March 25, 1993, by facsimile transmission. Id. The Board also observed that notwithstanding the its patience and efforts to facilitate the appeal, the Appellant has never filed the required Complaint and response to the Respondent's Motion.2 Rule to Show Cause, pp. 3-4. Therefore, in accordance with the procedures set forth in Rule 31 of the Board Rules, the Appellant was given fifteen (15) days from the receipt of the Rule to Show Cause to provide reasons, in writing, why the appeal should not be dismissed with prejudice for failure to prosecute. Rule to Show Cause, p. 4. The appeal record shows that the United States Postal Service delivered the Rule to Show Cause the Appellant on April 5, 1994. Under Rule 31 of the Board Rules, an appellant who has disregarded the Board's rules and directives, and otherwise indicates an intention not to continue the orderly prosecution or defense of its appeal, is subject to having the Board dismiss the case for failure to prosecute after the appellant is given an opportunity to show cause why the appeal should not be dismissed. Rosemark, GPO BCA 30-90 (April 22, 1994), Sl. op. at 6. The Board has attempted to give the Appellant an opportunity under Rule 31 of the Board Rules to show cause why its appeal should not be dismissed for failure to prosecute. However, the Appellant has not responded to the Rule to Show Cause in this case, nor has it asked the Board, in writing, for an extension of time in which to respond. Board Rules, Preface to Rules, ¶ III.C. THEREFORE, since the time for receipt of the Appellant's written reasons showing why the appeal should not be dismissed with prejudice for failure to prosecute has now expired without any response from the Contractor, the Respondent's Motion is GRANTED, the appeal is DISMISSED with prejudice for failure to prosecute, and the case is closed. Bedrock Printing Company, GPO BCA 05-91 (April 10, 1992), Sl. op. at 8; Rosemark, supra, Sl. op. at 7. It is so Ordered. April 22, 1994 STUART M. FOSS Administrative Judge _______________ 1 Rule 31 states, in pertinent part, that the Board may dismiss an appeal: "[w]henever a record discloses the failure of either party to file documents required by these rules, respond to notices or correspondence from the Board, comply with an order of the Board, or otherwise indicated an intention not to continue the orderly prosecution or defense of an appeal, . . .". 2 In the Rule to Show Cause, the Board expressly held that the Appellant's Notice of Appeal did not sufficiently define the Contractor's claim or identify the issues in the case, so as to be deemed a Complaint within the meaning of Rule 6(a) of the Board Rules. Rule To Show Cause, p. 4.