Boards' CDA Jurisdiction Does Not Extend To Third-Party Beneficiaries
Client Alert | less than 1 min read | 06.30.09
Reversing the ASBCA decision, 08-1 BCA ¶ 33,793 (2008), the Federal Circuit holds in Winter v. FloorPro, Inc. (June 26, 2009), that the ASBCA does not have jurisdiction to hear claims brought by third-party beneficiaries, because they are not "contractors" under the Contract Disputes Act. The Federal Circuit distinguishes its prior holding that the Court of Federal Claims does have jurisdiction to hear claims by third-party beneficiaries, observing that jurisdiction granted to the CFC under the Tucker Act is ";broader than the Board's jurisdiction under the CDA."
Contacts
Insights
Client Alert | 2 min read | 12.19.25
GAO Cautions Agencies—Over-Redact at Your Own Peril
Bid protest practitioners in recent years have witnessed agencies’ increasing efforts to limit the production of documents and information in response to Government Accountability Office (GAO) bid protests—often will little pushback from GAO. This practice has underscored the notable difference in the scope of bid protest records before GAO versus the Court of Federal Claims. However, in Tiger Natural Gas, Inc., B-423744, Dec. 10, 2025, 2025 CPD ¶ __, GAO made clear that there are limits to the scope of redactions, and GAO will sustain a protest where there is insufficient evidence that the agency’s actions were reasonable.
Client Alert | 7 min read | 12.19.25
In Bid to Ban “Woke AI,” White House Imposes Transparency Requirements on Contractors
Client Alert | 5 min read | 12.19.25
Navigating California’s Evolving Microplastics Landscape in 2026
Client Alert | 19 min read | 12.18.25
2025 GAO Bid Protest Annual Report: Where Have All the Protests Gone?
