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—rx96/11/2087 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—rx96/11/2087 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