-
Jun 20, 2024 | 
mondaq.com | Michelle Coleman |John Nakoneczny |Zariah Altman |Stephen J. McBrady
In Konecranes Nuclear Equip. Servs. LLC,
ASBCA, Nos. 62797, 62827 (May 7, 2024), the Armed Services Board of
Contract Appeals (Board) awarded approximately $4.9 million in
delay-related breach damages to Konecranes Nuclear Equipment
Services (Konecranes) due to the Navy's breach of its implied
duty to not interfere on a commercial-item contract for the
provision of 25-ton general purpose portal cranes.
In May 2020, Konecranes completed construction of the first of
four cranes.
-
Apr 11, 2024 | 
lexblog.com | Michelle Coleman |Rina Gashaw |Zariah Altman
AI remains a critical focus of both the federal government and industry, with multiple efforts in recent weeks to address governance of the development and use of AI in the United States.
-
Apr 11, 2024 | 
mondaq.com | Michelle Coleman |Rina Gashaw |Zariah Altman
AI remains a critical focus of both the federal government and
industry, with multiple efforts in recent weeks to address
governance of the development and use of AI in the United States.
-
Jan 31, 2024 | 
mondaq.com | Michelle Coleman |Skye Mathieson |Charles Baek |Zariah Altman
On December 19, 2023, the United States District Court for the
District of Utah denied summary judgment in part to Vanderlande
Industries (Vanderlande), holding that a reasonable jury could find
that Vanderlande negligently misrepresented the viability of
subcontractor Ludvik Electric Co.'s (Ludvik) pass-through
claims during the parties' settlement negotiations over the
claims.
-
Jan 25, 2024 | 
lexblog.com | Michelle Coleman |Skye Mathieson |Charles Baek |Zariah Altman
On December 19, 2023, the United States District Court for the District of Utah denied summary judgment in part to Vanderlande Industries (Vanderlande), holding that a reasonable jury could find that Vanderlande negligently misrepresented the viability of subcontractor Ludvik Electric Co.’s (Ludvik) pass-through claims during the parties’ settlement negotiations over the claims.
-
Jan 17, 2024 | 
mondaq.com | Erin N. Rankin |Michelle Coleman |Zariah Altman
On December 20, 2023, the Armed Services Board of Contract
Appeals (Board) denied the government's motion to dismiss
a prime contractor's pandemic-related claims filed on behalf of
its subcontractors. The Board rejected the government's
arguments that the claims failed to state any claims for relief
that could be granted, were barred by the affirmative defense of
sovereign acts, and failed to provide separate sums certain for
purported sub-claims.
-
Jan 12, 2024 | 
lexblog.com | Erin EWilson Rankin |Michelle Coleman |Zariah Altman |Lucy Hendrix
On December 20, 2023, the Armed Services Board of Contract Appeals (Board) denied the government’s motion to dismiss a prime contractor’s pandemic-related claims filed on behalf of its subcontractors. The Board rejected the government’s arguments that the claims failed to state any claims for relief that could be granted, were barred by the affirmative defense of sovereign acts, and failed to provide separate sums certain for purported sub-claims.
-
Dec 1, 2023 | 
mondaq.com | Michelle Coleman |Zariah Altman
On November 2, 2023, the Department of Defense (DoD) released
its 2023 DoD Data, Analytics, and Artificial
Intelligence Adoption Strategy (2023 Strategy), and an
accompanying Fact Sheet, to accelerate the adoption of
analytics, data, and artificial intelligence (AI) technologies that
will enable better and faster decision-making at all levels and
across the DoD.
-
Nov 30, 2023 | 
lexblog.com | Michelle Coleman |Zariah Altman
On November 2, 2023, the Department of Defense (DoD) released its 2023 DoD Data, Analytics, and Artificial Intelligence Adoption Strategy (2023 Strategy), and an accompanying Fact Sheet, to accelerate the adoption of analytics, data, and artificial intelligence (AI) technologies that will enable better and faster decision-making at all levels and across the DoD.
-
Sep 12, 2023 | 
mondaq.com | Michelle Coleman |Amanda McDowell |Zariah Altman
On August 25, 2023, in ECC CENTCOM Constructors, LLC v. United
States, COFC No. 21-1169, the U.S. Court of Federal Claims
("the Court" or "COFC") barred ECC CENTCOM
Constructors, LLC ("ECC") from asserting claims that
should have been asserted before the Armed Services Board of
Contract Appeals ("ASBCA") citing the doctrine of claim
preclusion.
At the ASBCA, ECC had appealed a termination for default and
sought time extensions and damages due to excusable delay.
