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 | 5 min read | 04.13.26

EU Pharma Package: Global (Orphan) Marketing Authorization Compromise Proposal

In our fifth alert in this EU Pharma Package Series, we provided an analysis of the background and ongoing legal debates regarding the concept of the global marketing authorization (GMA). We discussed in particular the missed opportunities in the Pharma Package to further codify and clarify the GMA, in view of its central role in determining the regulatory data protection (RDP) rights of a medicinal product....