Lockheed Martin Services, Inc.
The Board denied the Defense Finance & Accounting Service's motion for reconsideration of a prior decision sustaining Lockheed Martin Services, Inc.'s appeals concerning payment for a license fee related to DFAS's use of software developed by LMSI. The Board concluded that any factual mischaracterization concerning the relationship between MIRORS and DRAS was harmless, that MIRORS was Government Furnished Property rather than Government-Furnished Equipment, and that the quantum challenge presented no new persuasive evidence.
Material Facts
- LMSI performed the Military Retired and Annuitant Pay Operations contract for DFAS.
- The contract included section J.4.6, titled "LIST OF PROPERTIES, FACILITIES, MATERIALS AND SERVICES OFFERED BY THE GOVERNMENT."
- Section J.4.6 identified MIRORS and the DRAS Automated Information System as Government Furnished Property.
- MIRORS worked in conjunction with DRAS.
- The prior decision awarded LMSI payment for a license fee related to DFAS's use of LMSI-developed software.
- DFAS relied on a DCAA audit in challenging the prior quantum determination.
- The prior decision stated that LMSI incurred unrecovered costs to develop RAPID exceeding the unpaid difference between the contract cap and the amount paid by Modification No. P00089.
Parties
- Appellant
- Lockheed Martin Services, Inc.
- Respondent Agency
- Defense Finance & Accounting Service
- Contract Number
- MDA220-01-D-0002
Full Legal Analysis
Create a free account to read the complete grounded legal brief for this decision, including the holding, every issue the Board decided, quantum, verified citations, and the case's citation graph.
Holding & Legal Reasoning
The Board's holding, background, and procedural posture for this decision.
Issues Presented
Every issue the Board decided, with its determination, reasoning, and supporting authority.
Quantum & Recovery
The claimed, awarded, and net dollar amounts at issue, itemized where the record supports it.
Verified Authorities & Citations
Every cited FAR, DFARS, CAS, and case-law authority, cross-checked against the source text.
Practitioner Takeaways
Practical guidance for contractors and counsel, distilled from the Board's ruling.
Similar Cases
Related decisions surfaced by semantic search across the full analyzed corpus.
Citation Graph
An interactive graph of this case's cited authorities, judge, agency, and related decisions.
Related Decisions
Same Judge
- Metal Trades, Inc.No. 62966November 2, 2021
- Powertronic Systems Florida, Inc.No. 62174October 19, 2021
- Huffman Construction, LLCNo. 62591, 62783August 5, 2021
- U.S. Pan American Solutions, LLCNo. 62629August 5, 2021
- URS Federal Support Services, Inc.No. 59998-QUANAugust 3, 2021
- G&S Carpet Mills, Inc.No. 62799June 25, 2021
Same Year
- Sparton DeLeon Springs, LLCNo. 60416December 28, 2016
- Kellogg Brown & Root Services, Inc.No. 59873, 60885December 21, 2016
- Lockheed Martin Integrated Systems, Inc.No. 59508, 59509December 20, 2016
- CDM Constructors, Inc.No. 59524December 20, 2016
- Astro Systems, Inc.No. 60769, 60781December 20, 2016
- First Division Design, LLCNo. 60884-975December 15, 2016
Same Issue
- Africa Transport Logistics CompanyNo. 64120October 1, 2026
- Huffman Construction, LLCNo. 62591, 62783September 30, 2026
- Martin Brothers ConstructionNo. 63196, 63431September 30, 2026
- Vigor Marine, LLCNo. 63405September 24, 2026
- US Military CorpNo. 64321September 24, 2026
- Scot Cardillo dba Engineers Tooling SupportNo. 61612September 22, 2026