09/11/89 Board of Public Works Minutes

Home Browse Search

274 REGULAR MEETING SEPTEMBER 11, 1989 ONE (1) EPIC RADIO WITH CHARGER, SERIAL #207 ONE (1) EPIC CARDIAC OBSERVATION RADIO (COR) WITH CHARGER 2. That the latter described property, in No. 1 immediately above, shall be purchased from Epic Radio, LaGrange, Illinois, for a total purchase price of five thousand dollars ($5,000.00), the same reflecting a reduction for the trade-in or exchange of the former described property, in No. 1 immediately above. 3. That the traded -in or exchanged property, to wit: ONE (1) EPIC RADIO WITH CHARGER, SERIAL #207 shall be removed from the inventory of the City of South Bend. ADOPTED this 11th day of September, 1989. BOARD OF PUBLIC WORKS CITY OF SOUTH BEND, INDIANA s/John E. Leszczynski, President s/Katherine Humphreys, Member ATTEST: s/Sandra M. Parmerlee, Clerk APPROVE RESCISSION OF BID OF MONTEDORO-WHITNEY FOR NINETEEN (19) LEVEL AND VELOCITY SENSING METERS Mr. Leszczynski advised that previously the Board awarded the bid of Montedoro-Whitney Corporation, 2741 McMillan Road, P.O. Box 321, San Luis Obispo, California for nineteen (19) Montedoro-Whitney Model Q-Logger Portable datalogging flow meters for a total base bid in the amount of $67,645.00. At this time, the City of South Bend has been advised that this company has been sued on a patent infringement matter and have lost the lawsuit. If the City pursues the bid award, there is some question of whether the company could provide the meters. Further, based on the Legal Department's review of the matter, if the City pursues the matter, the City could become liable. Therefore, it is being recommended that the bid be rescinded. Mr. Leszczynski noted that the meters will be re -bid at a later date. It is noted that for the following reasons, it has been recommended by the Legal Department that the July 24, 1989, bid award to Montedoro-Whitney Corporation be rescinded: 1. Montedoro-Whitney is involved in a patent infringement lawsuit concerning its acoustic probes such as the model that is the subject of the bid award in question. This material fact was not known to the Board until after the bid was awarded. 2. The Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit has found against Montedoro-Whitney and remanded the case back to the lower court for monetary and injunctive relief. 3. The lawsuit and Court decisions raise significant questions about Montedoro-Whitney's ability to perform as per its bid. 4. Although Montedoro-Whitney has petitioned the Court of Appeals for rehearing, the purchase and use by the City of the probes in question will likely violate any in- junction issued by the lower court should the case not be reheard. ti 1 1