BOYERS — US Investigations Services claims three former employees removed proprietary information before taking jobs with a competitor during a critical contract bidding period.

In a federal lawsuit filed Friday, USIS asks the courts to force the women to return the information in question and be permanently enjoined from sharing or using it.

USIS is suing Susan Callihan of Chicora; Sarah LeaAnn Baucom of Parker; and Sharon Vernick of Butler, for breach of contract, misappropriation of trade secrets, unfair competition, breach of fiduciary duty of loyalty, conversion and conspiracy.

“The defendants, acting in their own selfish interests, have placed in jeopardy the jobs of many of their former co-workers,” the lawsuit alleges.

USIS is identified as the county’s 10th largest employer by the Center for Workforce Information and Analysis. The Boyers office has 800 workers.

The lawsuits’ allegations stem from a government contract USIS is vying to renew.

USIS specializes in providing information and security services to government agencies and commercial enterprises.

According to the lawsuit, the employees at the Boyers site did work for the United States Office of Personnel Management (OPM). Specifically, the lawsuit states, USIS performs background investigations on candidates for high level federal jobs.

According to the lawsuit, USIS’s contract with OPM expires June 30, and the government agency is accepting bid proposals for the work for a new contract.

The lawsuit says a contract is expected to be awarded within weeks.

According to the lawsuit, Callihan and Baucom were among the people who helped assemble USIS’s proposal, which was submitted Feb. 3.

According to the lawsuit, Callihan, a USIS employee since 1999, was a team leader at the Boyers site. She resigned Jan. 10 and left Jan. 21.

Baucom, an employee since 2003, was an operations manager at the Boyers site. She resigned and left Jan. 24.

Vernick, an employee since 2004, was a marketing manager at company’s Grove City site. She resigned Jan. 11 and left Jan. 21.

The lawsuit states USIS did a forensic review on some of its computers after the women’s resignations seemed “coordinated.”

The lawsuit alleges that Callihan, on her last day of work, emailed confidential documents and proprietary information belonging to USIS to her personal email account.

The lawsuit alleges Baucom, before leaving, downloaded proprietary and confidential information, including parts of the contract proposal, to a portable storage device.

Vernick, the lawsuit alleges, helped the other two women.

The lawsuit claims the information in question was “gained through (USIS’s)

experience” in performing the same work for the same agency in past years, and would benefit any company competing for the contract.The lawsuit alleges that USIS officials believe all three women are now employed by or representing a contractor and subcontractor that have teamed up to file a proposal to compete with USIS and its subcontractor for the OPM contract.“If USIS is not provided with a fair opportunity to participate in these contracts, it may be forced to severely reduce the size of its workforce and/or close its Boyers operation,” the lawsuit states.The companies believed to be now employing the women, KeyPoint Government Solutions and Jupiter Corp. of Maryland, are not defendants in the lawsuit. A telephone message left with Jupiter was not returned.A KeyPoint spokeswoman confirmed that the company is employing one of the women, and issued the following statement: “At this point we have no comment on the pending litigation, especially given that the litigation doesn’t target KeyPoint.”Mark Willard, a Pittsburgh attorney representing USIS, and Michael John, corporate spokesman, refused comment, also citing the litigation.Vernick referred questions to her attorney, Jay Marinstein of Pittsburgh. He could not be reached.Baucom could not be reached.And a man who answered Callihan’s telephone said, “she’s not here, and don’t bother calling back.”In addition to returning the information, USIS is seeking monetary damages from the women. But the lawsuit states, “The defendants do not have the financial resources to compensate USIS for the millions of dollars in damages their improper conduct is intended to cause.”