1. Home
  2. |Insights
  3. |The Pen is Mightier: Typewritten Signature Invalidates CDA Claim

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.

Insights

Client Alert | 3 min read | 07.13.26

Amici Rally Behind Liberty Global, Urging Tenth Circuit to Rein in Economic Substance Doctrine

Following the 10th Circuit's April 21, 2026, decision affirming the disallowance of Liberty Global’s $2.4 billion deduction under the codified economic substance doctrine, I.R.C. § 7701(o), Liberty Global filed a petition for panel rehearing or rehearing en banc on June 5, 2026. That petition has since drawn significant amicus support from various industry groups representing large taxpayers, as discussed below....