1. Home
  2. |Insights
  3. |Claim Accrual and the Continuing Claims Doctrine: Board Has Jurisdiction Over Claim Comprised of Separate and Distinct Events that Fell within the CDA’s Six-Year Statute of Limitations Period

Claim Accrual and the Continuing Claims Doctrine: Board Has Jurisdiction Over Claim Comprised of Separate and Distinct Events that Fell within the CDA’s Six-Year Statute of Limitations Period

Client Alert | 1 min read | 05.03.22

In Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Company, ASBCA No. 62209 (a C&M case), the Armed Services Board of Contract Appeals (Board) held that the contractor’s claim, seeking recovery for impacts of over-and-above repair work during contract performance, was timely filed under the Contract Disputes Act’s six-year statute of limitations—rejecting an Air Force Motion for Summary Judgment and granting cross-motions filed on behalf of Lockheed Martin.  Recognizing that a contractor’s claim cannot accrue before the events that fix the liability of the government, the Board held Lockheed Martin’s claim did not have a single accrual date but, rather, multiple accrual dates based upon when the government approved each repair.  The Board separately held that those government approvals represented “the type of single-topic . . . yet repeated and distinct events” making Lockheed Martin’s claims timely under the well-recognized “continuing claim doctrine.”

Insights

Client Alert | 3 min read | 07.16.24

Boring Holes in the Patent Thicket: FTC Supports USPTO’s Proposed Rule Requiring All Terminally-Disclaimed Patents to Fall Together

The USPTO has proposed a rule rendering a patent unenforceable if it is disclaimed over another patent that is subsequently found invalid.  The FTC filed a comment letter in support of the USPTO’s proposed rule, noting that “the proposed rule would reduce the costs incurred by potential competitors challenging weak patents or defending against assertions of patent claims that are obvious variants of a single invention.”...