The Pen is Mightier: Typewritten Signature Invalidates CDA Claim
Client Alert | 1 min read | 01.05.17
In ABS Development Corp. (ASBCA Nov. 17, 2016), the Board dismissed for lack of jurisdiction certain contractor claims that had been “certified” by means of typewritten names in signature-font (rather than the acceptable handwritten or e-signatures) because a typewritten name “cannot be authenticated, and, therefore, is not a signature.” Because the CDA’s purpose is to bind contractors by means of a signed certificate that “cannot be easily disavowed by the purported author,” the Board held that typed signatures were jurisdictionally inadequate and could not be cured (via a substitute signature), a reminder to contractors that a critical element of litigating CDA claims is adherence to statutory requirements as well as the Board’s rules.
Contacts
Insights
Client Alert | 4 min read | 02.20.26
SCOTUS Holds IEEPA Tariffs Unlawful
On February 20, 2026, the Supreme Court issued a pivotal ruling in Trump v. V.O.S. Selections, negating the President’s ability to impose tariffs under IEEPA. The case stemmed from President Trump’s invocation of IEEPA to levy tariffs on imports from Canada, Mexico, China, and other countries, citing national emergencies. Challengers argued—and the Court agreed—that IEEPA does not delegate tariff authority to the President. The power to tariff is vested in Congress by the Constitution and cannot be delegated to the President absent express authority from Congress.
Client Alert | 7 min read | 02.20.26
Section 5949 Proposed Rule Puts the FAR Council's Chips on the Table
Client Alert | 5 min read | 02.20.26
Trump Administration Pursues MFN Pricing for Prescription Drugs
Client Alert | 4 min read | 02.19.26
Proposed NY Legislation May Mean Potential Criminal Charges for Unlicensed Crypto Firms
