Guardian Angels Medical Service Dogs, Inc. v. United States
2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 217
| Fed. Cir. | 2016Background
- Guardian Angels contracted with VA under BPA 218 to supply service dogs and provide health insurance for them; contract amended Aug 2011 for more dogs.
- Aug 31, 2012, VA terminated BPA 218 for default and suspended open orders; termination provided a disputes clause appeal option.
- Guardian Angels claimed the termination should be for convenience and demanded payment for work performed and reasonable termination costs.
- Guardian Angels filed suit in the Court of Federal Claims on Jan 7, 2014 seeking damages; the trial court dismissed as time-barred under 41 U.S.C. § 7104(b)(3).
- The court held the termination’s finality was suspended by Guardian Angels’ timely request for reconsideration, and the 12-month appeal period began when the VA denied reconsideration in May 2013; Guardian Angels’ complaint was timely filed within 12 months of that final decision.
- The Court of Federal Claims’ reconsideration decision and the government’s arguments about “spending time” on reconsideration were central to whether the period began to run
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| When did the 12-month appeal period begin? | Guardian Angels: finality suspended by reconsideration begun March 2013; tolling until May 2013 final decision. | Government: finality attached to Aug 2012 termination; no tolling from reconsideration. | Twelve-month period began May 3, 2013, after reconsideration denial; suit timely. |
| Does a contracting officer's consideration of additional evidence during reconsideration nullify finality? | Guardian Angels argues that March 2013 review kept the decision open. | Government argues finality was not tolled merely by reconsideration actions. | March 2013 reconsideration discussion vitiated finality; May 3, 2013 denial was the final decision triggering the 12-month period. |
Key Cases Cited
- Roscoe Ajax Construction Co. v. United States, 458 F.2d 55 (Ct. Cl. 1972) (willingness to meet and discuss kept matter open, destroying finality)
- Dayley v. United States, 169 Ct. Cl. 305 (Ct. Cl. 1965) (agency reconsideration can suspend finality)
- Locomotive Engineers v. United States, 482 U.S. 270 (1987) (reconsideration can render final agency action nonfinal)
- Vepco of Sarasota, Inc. v. United States, 26 Cl. Ct. 639 (Ct. Cl. 1992) (administrative reconsideration can affect finality)
- Sikorsky Aircraft Corp. v. United States, 773 F.3d 1315 (Fed. Cir. 2014) (timeliness and finality under CDA)