Try our Advanced Search for more refined results
United States Of America et al v. Lockheed Martin Corporation et al
Case Number:
1:09-cv-00324
Court:
Nature of Suit:
Judge:
Firms
- Akin Gump
- Baker Donelson
- Bradley Arant
- Brown Buchanan
- Butler Snow LLP
- Galiher DeRobertis
- Helmer Martins
- Jenner & Block
- Vorys
- Watkins & Eager
Companies
Sectors & Industries:
-
September 29, 2011
SAIC, Others Pay $22.6M To Settle Bid-Rigging Claims
Science Applications International Corp., its subcontractor and two ex-government employees on Thursday agreed to pay $22.6 million to settle a whistleblower suit in Mississippi accusing them of bid-rigging a $3.2 billion government contract for a data processing center.
-
May 02, 2011
SAIC Denied Quick Win In Bid-Rigging Case
A Mississippi federal judge on Friday denied Science Applications International Corp.'s bids for summary judgment on damages and liability in a whistleblower suit accusing it of bid-rigging a $3.2 billion government contract for a data processing center.
-
April 26, 2011
SAIC Can't Snip Whistleblower From Bid-Rigging Suit
A federal judge in Mississippi on Tuesday denied Science Applications International Corp.'s bid to cut a whistleblower from a suit accusing it of bid-rigging a $3.2 billion government contract.
-
April 18, 2011
SAIC To Add Evidence In GSA Bid-Rigging Suit
Science Applications International Corp. was allowed to supplement its motion for summary judgment with late evidence Monday in a Mississippi qui tam suit accusing it of bid-rigging a $3.2 billion U.S. General Services Administration contract.
-
January 24, 2011
Lockheed Martin Settles Navy Contract Suit For $2M
Lockheed Martin Corp. has agreed to pay $2 million to settle a False Claims Act suit that accused the company of conspiring with other contractors to rig a bid for a $3.2 billion U.S. Navy contract.
-
November 16, 2010
Lockheed Wants FCA Suit Over $3.2B Contract Tossed
Lockheed Martin Corp. has asked a court to throw out a qui tam action accusing the defense contractor, two other companies and directors at a U.S. Navy supercomputer center of rigging a bid on a $3.2 billion task order to build a massive data facility, arguing that the relator in the case has failed to support the allegations.