Tim Colton is reporting the Federal law suit against Bollinger, alleging fraud in the modification of eight WPBs, has been dismissed. Full story here.
Chuck Hill's CG Blog
Tim Colton is reporting the Federal law suit against Bollinger, alleging fraud in the modification of eight WPBs, has been dismissed. Full story here.
Chuck Hill's CG Blog 
Very disappointing
The judge actually said the DoJ showed “no plausible theory of fraud”.
That is ridiculous
They used thin steel on purpose, falsified the calculations and lied about them.
Now the contract case will probably never happen or drag on for years while Bollinger gets richer off the FRCs
Apparently crime pays
The USCG should feel ashamed for rolling over
What goes around will soon – unfortunately – come around
“The complaint does not allege facts indicating that Bollinger’s initial representation of the hull strength was knowingly false or made in deliberate ignorance or disregard for the truth… Thus, the complaint does not even allege that Bollinger made an intentionally false or recklessly untrue statement, or acted with deliberate indifference,” the judge wrote.
Is that possible? Basically the judge says there is no possible possibility there was fraud according to the DoJ’s complaint? That seems ridiculous. Hell we did that in our case against ICGS etc. We were never dismissed on the merits. How ironic. I lose on relator/jurisdictional issues but not on the merits and the DoJ has no jurisdictional issues, loses on the merits and because they went after Bollinger not ICGS and Northrop? Maybe they should have joined our case? I hope the DoJ can fix this in the 20 day window. Is the judge giving them the hole that has to be fixed or is the info there and the DoJ is gonna lose no matter what?
Look at what Bollinger said. Amazing that they brag that they haven’t been held accountable and the CG leadership just keeps rolling over and enabling them
“This has been going on for four years, the allegations,” Boysie Bollinger said. “We’ve been winning contracts throughout that time, so the contracts and the lawsuit are unrelated, in my opinion.”
How ironic. I lose (for the DoJ) on relator/jurisdictional issues but not on the merits and the DoJ has no jurisdictional issues but loses on the merits because they went after Bollinger not ICGS and Northrop? What if they had joined my case?
Tim Colton’s Maritime Memos (http://www.coltoncompany.com/) is reporting, “that on Thursday District Judge Sarah S. Vance refused to revive the Government’s case against Bollinger Shipyards over the eight 123-foot WPBs. So the saga finally ends. August 3, 2013.”
Federal Judge dismisses another charge against Bollinger:
http://www.marinelog.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=4827:federal-judge-dismisses-government-suit-against-bollinger&catid=1:latest-news&Itemid=195
Quoting MarineLog, “In court papers, Judge Vance wrote, ‘The United States has failed to allege facts that allow the inference that Bollinger acted knowingly or with reckless disregard or deliberate ignorance of the truth. Because its First Amended Complaint lacks a plausible theory of fraudulent inducement of acceptance of delivery or of payment, the Court must dismiss the United States’ FCA claims.'”
This is good to see. Bollinger is one of our partners in industry. How can you sue them when the evidence in this dismissal clearly shows the Coast Guard knew of alledged fraud as far back as 2004, yet continued with six more 123 conversions!!!
If this “fraud” was so severe as the government claims, then the Coast Guard should have issued a stop work order by November 2004.
The case against Bollinger has been revived, http://www.nola.com/business/index.ssf/2014/12/fed_appeals_court_revives_laws.html
The case lives on: http://www.nola.com/politics/index.ssf/2015/09/governments_case_against_bolli.html
(Thanks to MD for bringing this to my attention)