The Pen is Mightier: Typewritten Signature Invalidates CDA Claim
Client Alert | less than 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 | 2 min read | 10.28.26
Debriefing to Dead Briefing: How to Avoid Dismissal by Identifying “Required” Debriefings
A recent GAO decision, Encon Desbuild JV4, LLC, highlights a critical pitfall for contractors: GAO dismissed as untimely a protest filed within 10 days of a “debriefing” because the debriefing was not “required” under GAO’s precedent and the applicable regulations. This was true even though the contracting officer incorrectly told the contractor that the debriefing was required and provided under FAR part 15.
Client Alert | 7 min read | 10.27.26
Client Alert | 5 min read | 10.27.26
The UK Defence Footprint 2026 and the Warsaw Defence Plan: Investment, Innovation and Opportunities
Client Alert | 6 min read | 10.26.26
Executive Order Creates Women’s Health Task Force, Rescinds Prior Initiatives
