96/11/2087 14:27 2s39648406 aMAMTLO AND Assoos Pace 01/10
Case 2:06-cv-00748-JLR Document 41 Filed 04/23/2007 Page 4 of 10
1 688 ~ 205-519?
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON
‘Mariyam Akmal d/b/a AEGIT IT,
SOLUTIONS, Inc. and Mariyam
‘Akmal, individually,
Plaintiff,
Case No.: 2:06-ev-00748-JLR
PLAINTIFF RESPONSE TO
DEFENDANTS’ JOINT MOTION
Cingular Wireless Inc, et al. SUMMARY JUDGMENT
2
Defendant. )
I. _ INTRODUCTION AND RELIEF REQUESTED
Come Now the Plaintiffs’, Mariyam Akmal d/b/a AEGIS IT SOLUTIONS,
Inc., and Mariyam Akmal, individually AND request that the Defendants’
motion for summary judgment be denied in its entirety for the reasons and
authority presented below. These reasons and authority are supported by
evidence in the attached exhibits and the declarations of plaintiffs’.
Certain Te
Reference in the Secon ement Which Created Obligation:
1c Be Buy :
JAKMAL & AEGIS RESPONSE TO DEFENDANTS’ The Law Office of Anamile & Associates|
JOINT MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT 1113 “A” Street, suite 209
Page 1 of 10 Tacoma WA 98402
(283) 964-2406-Ph
(233) 964-e5e4—rx96/11/2087 14:27 2s39548406 aMAMTLO AND Assoos Pace 02/10
Case 2:06-cv-00748-JLR Document 41 Filed 04/23/2007 Page 2 of 10
‘This case involves an agreement between plaintiff Aegis IT Solutions,
Inc,, (“Aegis”) and defendants’ TEKsystems, Inc. and Cingular Wireless, Inc. to
provide contract personnel for a Cingular Wireless, Inc. technology project.
Pursuant to TEKsystems’ secondary supplier contract with Aegis, in certain
instances, the terms of the primary supplier contract between TEKsystems and
‘Cingular applied to Aegis in it’s corp-to-corp relationship with TEKsystems. In
other words a carefull reading of the secondary supplier agreement clearly
reveals that Aegis’ contractual relationship and terms for working on the
project necessarily included certain provisions of the primary agreement
between TEKsystems and Cingular.
For example in the Secondary Supplier agreement Section 11 Term it
states:
The term of this Agreement shalll correspond to the term as set forth in the
Primary Agreement between Primary Supplier and Customer and can be
canceled by Secondary Supplier only in accordance with the terms of said
Primary Agreement. Primary Supplier reserves the right to terminate this
Agreement upon not less than (5) days prior notice at any time without cause
during the term of this Agreement.
‘The corresponding provision in the Primary agreement is found at
Section 3.31. Term of Agreement:
a. — This Agreement is effective on September 1, 2004 and, unless
Terminated or Cancelled as provided in this Agreement, shall remain in effect for
a term ending on June 30, 2006. The Parties may extend the term of this
Agreement by mutual agreement in writing.
b. Either Party may terminate this Agreement upon (30) days prior
written notice to the other Party setting forth the effective date of such
Termination.
JAKMAL & AEGIS RESPONSE TO DEFENDANTS’ The Lew Office of Amanilo & Associates!
JOINT MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT 1113 SAY Straat, Suite 209
Page 2 of 10 Tacoma WA 98402
(253) 964-8406-Ph
(283) 964-98aa—rx96/11/2087 14:27 2839548406 aMAMTLO AND Assoos Pace 03/10
Case 2:06-cv-00748-JLR Document 41 Filed 04/23/2007 Page 3 of 10
Clearly in order for Aegis to understand ite rights and obligations under
its Secondary Supplier agreement it would need to have access to the Primary
agreement and could reasonably infer that certain provisions of the Primary
agreement applied to it as a corporation as well ~ not simply as an assigned
employee. It would seem from the foregoing that Secondary Supplier, Aegi
and Cingular had contractual obligations requiring them to give at least 30
days notice to all parties. Whereas TEKsystems was only obligated to give
Acgis 5 days notice but to give Cingular 30 days notice. For example Aegis’
was required to refer to the Primary Agreement for guidance in terminating the
agreement with TEKeystems; that clause starts out with ‘either party” at that
point Aegis has no way of knowing that the clause did not apply to Cingular or
TEKsystems as it relates to notice to AEGIS. By using the phrase ‘either
party” it is reasonable for Aegis to believe that it was on equal footing as a corp:
to-corp. Unlike her co-workers who were employees of TEKsystems, Ms. Akmal
‘was an employee of AEGIS. AEGIS was in a corp-to-corp relationship covered
‘by a contract that in accordance with Section 20. could not be
...amended, modified, altered, supplemented, or changed in any way
except in writing, signed by the parties and attached hereto as an amendment.
AEGIS received no warnings from TEKsystems or Cingular that the
schedule set for its employees was unacceptable until June 1, 2005 when a
notice went out to the EOD team, No such notice was communicated
separately to AEGIS regarding the impact on its operations and employees who
were to AEGIS’ knowledge meeting the requirements of the project.
For purposes of following procedures for making changes and
termination of the Secondary Supplier agreement AEGIS believed that it was
part of triangle of mutual obligations to follow provisions in the Sccondary and
Primary agreements as an approved sub-contractor to that agreement with the
permission of Cingular pursuant to Section 3.3 of the Primary Agreement.
ondary Supplier Agreement ude He
Include Negotiated Terms of a Standard Workweek.
JAKMAL & AEGIS RESPONSE 70 DEFENDANTe’ The Law Office of Amamilo £ Asscoiates|
JOINT MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGGENT 1113 “A” street, suite 209
Page 2 of 10 ‘Tacoma WA 98402
(253) 964-850a-Fx