| L-3 COMMUNICATIONS
TITAN CORP filed this 10-Q on 05/06/2005. |
|
|
NO. 04-CV-1248, was filed on
July 27, 2004, on behalf of five individual
plaintiffs against Titan, CACI and CACI affiliates, and
contains allegations similar to those in Saleh. Class
certification has not been requested in Ibrahim. Titan intends
to defend these lawsuits vigorously.
On
August 16, 2002, Perimex International Corporation
(Perimex) filed a complaint against Titan, Titan
Wireless, Inc. (Titan Wireless) and a former Titan
Wireless employee in San Diego Superior Court in San
Diego, California. Perimex later dismissed its complaint
voluntarily and filed a new complaint with substantially
similar allegations in the United States District Court
for the Southern District of California, NO. 03-CV-1037
IEG (WMC). The complaint alleged breach of contract,
breach of the covenant of good faith and fair dealing,
intentional interference with existing contractual
relationships and prospective business advantage and
violation of the California unfair competition law
arising from an alleged failure of Titan Wireless to
enter a joint venture with Perimex to develop a
telecommunications network in Argentina and other
related alleged misconduct. On April 25, 2005, the
court dismissed the complaint with prejudice, and the
case was terminated.
On
January 23, 2004, Titan, together with its
wholly-owned subsidiary, Titan Wireless, Inc., and
Titan Wireless's wholly-owned subsidiary, Titan
Africa, Inc., were named as defendants in
Gonzales
Communications, Inc. v. Titan Wireless, Inc.,
Titan Africa, Inc., The Titan Corporation,
Geolution International Inc., and Mundi
development, Inc., a
lawsuit filed in the U.S. District Court for the
Southern District of California, NO. 04-CV-00147 WQH
(JMA). The complaint relates to the purchase by Gonzales
Communications of equipment and related services under
an equipment purchase agreement entered into with Titan
Wireless in June 2001. Gonzales Communications
contends that the equipment and services delivered were
unsatisfactory. In the complaint, Gonzales
Communications seeks direct damages in the amount of
$0.9 million plus interest, representing the amount
Gonzales Communications alleges to have previously paid
under the agreement, and consequential damages of
approximately $16.3 million. To date, Titan and its
subsidiaries have not received payment in full under the
agreement for the equipment and services that were
delivered to Gonzales Communications. Titan has filed a
counterclaim against Gonzales Communications for in
excess of $1.2 million. Titan intends to defend its
position vigorously.
On
March 14, 2005, Mister X, a former
consultant of Titan filed a claim with the Preliminary
Committee on Labor Disputes Settlement in Saudi Arabia. Mister
X alleges that Titan wrongfully terminated
his consulting agreement and that he was defamed by
Titan's publication in a local newspaper of a mandatory
notice that he is no longer representing Titan. The
plaintiff is seeking approximately $21.9 million in
damages. Titan intends to defend its position
vigorously.
In
October 2002, Titan received a grand jury subpoena
from the Antitrust Division of the DoJ requesting the
production of documents relating to information
technology services performed for the Air Force at
Hanscom Air Force Base in Massachusetts. Titan has been
informed that other companies who have performed similar
services have received subpoenas as well. Titan is not
aware of any illegal or inappropriate conduct and has
been cooperating and will continue to cooperate fully
with the investigation.
In
March 2003, Titan received a subpoena from the
Office of Inspector General for the National Aeronautics
and Space Administration, or NASA, seeking certain
records relating to billing for labor services in
connection with its contracts with NASA. Titan also
received a subpoena from the Office of Inspector General
for the General Services Administration, or GSA, seeking
similar records relating to billing for labor categories
in connection with contracts with GSA. Titan is not
aware of any illegal or inappropriate conduct and has
been cooperating and will continue to cooperate fully
with the investigation.
19
Powered
by: | |