The U.S. Armed Services Board of Contract Appeals' recent decision in HD Inc., ASBCA 63794, demonstrates the importance of following the terms of a solicitation when submitting a proposal on federal projects, particularly as...more
Government contractors working for the Department of Education (DE), the United States Agency for International Development (USAID), and other agencies like the National Science Foundation (NSF) and Consumer Financial...more
Most government contracts include a Changes clause (notably, FAR 52.243-1), which grants the Government the right to order changes to the scope of the contractor’s work. That clause also entitles the contractor to an...more
When the U.S. Government licenses commercial software, it generally does so under the same terms as any other commercial software licensee, unless the terms of that license are inconsistent with federal law or do not...more
On Monday, June 24, 2024, a federal judge for the US District Court for the Northern District of Texas (the Court) instituted a nationwide injunction on the enforcement of portions of the US Department of Labor’s (DOL) 2023...more
When is it appropriate to consider “extrinsic evidence” of the parties’ intent when interpreting a contractor’s release of claims? A new decision out of the Armed Services Board of Contract Appeals (“ASBCA”), Sonabend Company...more
On December 20, 2023, the Armed Services Board of Contract Appeals (the Board) denied the government’s motion to dismiss pandemic-related claims. In doing so, the Board rejected the government’s arguments alleging that the...more
In Granite Construction Company, ASBCA No. 62281 (November 1, 2023), the Armed Services Board of Contract Appeals ("Board") addressed the issue of what constitutes a reasonable period of time to suspend work under the...more
The Armed Services Board of Contract Appeals (ASBCA or Board) issued an opinion in Appeal of StructSure Projects, Inc., granting StructSure additional COVID-19 related costs arising under a fixed-price task order. ASBCA No....more
In Innovative Technologies, Inc., ASBCA No. 6186, 62185, the Armed Services Board of Contract Appeals (“ASBCA” or the “Board”) held that, despite the federal government’s failure to include or incorporate the McNamara-O’Hara...more
WHAT: After previewing earlier this year that it was reconsidering its existing precedent, the Federal Circuit held yesterday that the requirement that contractors state a “sum certain” in claims brought under the Contract...more
The Armed Services Board of Contract Appeals’ (“ASBCA or “Board”) decision in Fluor Intercontinental, Inc., serves as an important reminder to prime contractors to be cognizant of the clauses they include in subcontracts for...more
The Armed Services Board of Contract Appeals (ASBCA) recently issued a decision regarding a contractor’s claim for increased performance costs due to the economic impact of the COVID-19 pandemic. Notable about this case is...more
In a recent Armed Services Board of Contract Appeals (ASBCA) decision, Pave-Tech, Inc., the ASBCA found that the decisions a construction contractor makes, even from the very beginning of a project, have consequences. In...more
Welcome to our new “Lifecycle of a Claim” series. This series will explore the Contract Disputes Act claims process, with practical guidance stemming from recent case law every step of the way. ...more
The Contract Disputes Act allows contractors seeking payment of a claim arising from a contract with the federal government six years from the date it accrued to submit the claim to the contracting officer. Failure to do so...more
In Sauer, Inc. (September 29, 2021), the Armed Services Board of Contract Appeals discussed the limits of authority that a Government representative had to utilize substitute materials in lieu of materials specified in a task...more
The Davis-Bacon Act and the FAR - The Davis-Bacon Act, 40 U.S.C. §§ 3131-3148, (the Act) is a fact of life in federal government construction contracting. The Act, passed in 1931, establishes the requirement of paying the...more
In Nauset Construction Corporation,1 the Armed Service Board of Contract Appeals once again addressed how Government allegations of fraud impact the Board's ability to hear a claim....more
Federal contractors received some good news from the Federal Circuit this holiday season. The court held, in Boeing Co. v. Secretary of Air Force, that the Department of Defense (DoD) Federal Acquisition Regulation...more
In 1901, in rural County Galway, Ireland, my Irish-speaking great-grandparents made their mark (“+”) on the decennial census taken that year. Whether they did so from a lack of literacy, or simply resented the census taker, I...more
In a departure from its prior precedent, the Armed Services Board of Contract Appeals (ASBCA) recently held in Kamaludin Slyman CSC, ASBCA Nos. 62006, 62007, 62008, that a typed name at the end of an email satisfies the...more
Weasel words: “Words or statements that are intentionally ambiguous or misleading.” Concise Oxford English Dictionary 1635 (11th ed. rev. 2008). The Armed Services Board of Contract Appeals (ASBCA) recently dismissed in...more
On Oct. 18, 2019, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit issued its decision in Raytheon Co. v. Sec. of Def., holding that salary costs associated with lobbying activities are expressly unallowable, and therefore...more
The standard for summary judgment is well-settled in federal litigation: construing all facts in the light most favorable to the non-moving party, summary judgment is properly granted only when there are no genuine issues of...more