UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA ____________________________________ ) UNITED STATES OF AMERICA ex rel. ) LARRY HAWKINS, et al., ) ) Plaintiffs, ) ) v. ) Civil Action No. 15-2105 (ABJ) ) MANTECH INTERNATIONAL ) CORPORATION, et al., ) ) Defendants. ) ____________________________________) MEMORANDUM OPINION Larry Hawkins, William Randall Hayes, Clinton Sawyer, James Locklear, and Kent Nelson brought this lawsuit against their former employer, ManTech Telecommunications and Information Systems Corporation (“ManTech”), and its parent corporation, ManTech International Corporation, alleging four violations of the False Claims Act on behalf of the United States, 31 U.S.C. § 3729 (2012), and a violation of the Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act (“TVPRA”). 18 U.S.C. § 1581 et seq. (2012). The second amended complaint alleges that ManTech submitted claims to the United States government that were false in several respects: the number of labor hours employees reportedly worked; the data entered into a system called “SAMS- E”; the qualifications of the employees; and the company’s compliance with the TVPRA. Second Am. Compl. [Dkt. # 30] (“SAC”) ¶¶ 22–145; 265–90. Plaintiffs also allege that ManTech violated the TVPRA when it forced them to work under the threat of serious harm and the threatened abuse of legal process. Id. ¶¶ 146–263. 1 Defendants moved to dismiss all the counts pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 9(b), 12(b)(1), and 12(b)(6). Defs.’ Mot. to Dismiss the Second Am. Compl. [Dkt. # 41] (“Defs.’ Mot.”); Defs.’ Mem. of Law in Supp. of Defs.’ Mot. [Dkt. # 41] (“Defs.’ Mem.”). Plaintiffs opposed the motion, Pls.’ Opp. to Defs.’ Mot. [Dkt. # 43] (“Pls.’ Opp”). For the reasons stated below, defendants’ motion will be granted as to Counts II, III, and V. It will be denied as to Counts I and IV. BACKGROUND I. The Contract On May 31, 2012, the U.S. Army awarded Contract No. W56HZV-12-C-0127 (the “Contract”) 1 to ManTech Telecommunications and Information Systems Corporation, a wholly owned subsidiary of ManTech International Corporation. SAC ¶ 5; Contract [Dkt. # 30] at 6. The Contract provided for “logistics sustainment and support” for Mine Resistant Ambush Protected vehicles (“MRAPs”). Contract at 6. These vehicles were developed and designed to protect U.S. military personnel from improvised explosive device attacks and ambushes. Id. ¶ 2. Troops in MRAPs are fourteen times more likely to survive the blast than those riding in other vehicles, and they have saved thousands of lives. Id. ¶ 4. The Contract provided for MRAP repair facilities in Kuwait City, Kuwait. Id. ¶ 5. The Contract had an original value of $823,446,067.28 for “services consisting of maintenance and repair of MRAP vehicles” with a completion date of November 26, 2012. SAC 1 Plaintiffs have attached what they believe to be is a publicly-available copy of the Contract. Plaintiffs stated that they have requested a copy of the Contract from defendants, but defendants have refused. SAC at 6 n.1. 2 ¶ 23. It also offered successive contract options, which brought the total value of the Contract to $2.85 ...
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals