1. Home
  2. |Insights
  3. |No Double-Dipping: Board Lacks Jurisdiction Over New Theories Asserted in Government’s Amended Answer

No Double-Dipping: Board Lacks Jurisdiction Over New Theories Asserted in Government’s Amended Answer

Client Alert | 1 min read | 04.29.16

In AeroVironment, Inc. (Mar. 30, 2016), following an apparent settlement of the government's cost disallowance claim, the ASBCA denied the government’s request to amend its answer (in order to “clarify” entitlement to additional quantum) because the proposed amendments constituted new “claims” that required new final decisions. Acknowledging that parties may ordinarily revise quantum without running afoul of jurisdictional concerns, in this case the Board found that the proposed amendments (which were premised on a new interpretation of FAR Parts 31 and 42, a different calculation methodology, and greatly increased the monetary stakes), involved different “operative facts” and “would alter the ‘essential nature’ and fundamental basis of the claim asserted in the final decisions,” over which the Board lacked jurisdiction.

Insights

Client Alert | 4 min read | 10.21.25

Pivot Point for 340B: HRSA Rebate Model Pilot Program Approaches Launch

The deadline for Department of Health and Human Services (“HHS”) to notify approved manufacturers of acceptance into the 340B Rebate Model Pilot Program has passed, and stakeholders across the healthcare industry should start planning for compliance and operational changes. The Model Pilot Program may also face legal challenges that could delay or disrupt implementation....