Northrop Grumman Computing Systems, Inc. v. United States
2013 U.S. App. LEXIS 3512
| Fed. Cir. | 2013Background
- ICE awarded Northrop a commercial items contract NAS5-01143 with a delivery order for Oakley network monitoring software
- Northrop paid an upfront Oakley fee and obtained private financing for Oakley software
- Assignments of payments from the delivery order were made to ESCgov and Citizens Leasing Corp. without government notice
- Northrop filed a CDA claim letter on Sept 21, 2006 seeking damages for not exercising option year #1
- CO denied the claim; Northrop filed suit in the Court of Federal Claims; Northrop later filed a second CDA claim letter in July 2011
- Court of Federal Claims dismissed Northrop I for lack of jurisdiction and Northrop II as moot; appellate court reversed Northrop I and dismissed Northrop II as moot
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Northrop I satisfied CDA notice requirements | Northrop asserts the letter was a valid CDA claim under FAR and the CDA | ICE argues the letter lacked adequate notice of third-party financing and pass-through issues | Northrop I valid CDA claim; jurisdiction exists |
| Effect of private financing assignments on CDA claim validity | Assignments do not defeat Northrop’s direct breach claim; Severin not applicable | Assignments render the claim a pass-through or diminish direct liability | Assignments do not defeat the claim; Northrop may proceed as proper party; Severin not applied |
| Whether Northrop II is moot given Northrop I disposition | Northrop II raises a different procedural posture but relies on the same facts | Dismissal of Northrop II warranted if same claim is pending on appeal | Northrop II moot; reversed/remanded Net outcome: Northrop I reversed and remanded; Northrop II dismissed as moot |
Key Cases Cited
- Reflectone, Inc. v. Dalton, 60 F.3d 1572 (Fed. Cir. 1995) (three requirements of a non-routine CDA claim; notice and basis sufficient)
- Contract Cleaning Maint., Inc. v. United States, 811 F.2d 586 (Fed. Cir. 1987) (adequate notice required; form of claim not rigid)
- Maropakis Carpentry, Inc. v. United States, 609 F.3d 1323 (Fed. Cir. 2010) (final decision as jurisdictional prerequisite under CDA)
- Sharman Co. v. United States, 2 F.3d 1564 (Fed. Cir. 1993) (jurisdictional pre-requisite; final decision required)
- Beaconwear Clothing Co. v. United States, 355 F.2d 583 (Ct. Cl. 1966) (assignment of rights does not forfeit the claim; severed from pass-through)
- Colonial Navigation Co. v. United States, 181 F. Supp. 237 (Ct. Cl. 1960) (assignment of a claim does not destroy the underlying contract claim)
- Garrett v. General Elec. Co., 987 F.2d 747 (Fed. Cir. 1993) (application of CDA standards in claim assessment)
- Reflectone, Inc. v. United States, 60 F.3d 1572 (Fed. Cir. 1995) (reaffirmed CDA claim requirements)