DynPort Vaccine Company LLC
DynPort Vaccine Company LLC appealed six unilateral contract modifications directing no-cost corrective work under an inspection clause. The Board denied the Army's motion to dismiss, holding that the modifications constituted final decisions on government claims despite the contracting officer's subsequent letter stating that no final decisions had been issued.
Material Facts
- The Army awarded DynPort Vaccine Company LLC a cost-reimbursement, cost-sharing, award-fee, research and development type contract.
- The contracting officer issued six later modifications from October 2014 through July 2015 directing DynPort to perform work at no cost to the government.
- The six later modifications required no-cost corrective work on the identical legal and factual grounds as Modification No. P00431.
- The contracting officer's July 31, 2015 letter stated that no contracting officer final decisions had been issued concerning the six modifications.
- The same letter stated that the modifications were fully effective and had to be carried out as directed.
- DynPort filed its appeal five days after the contracting officer's letter.
Parties
- Appellant
- DynPort Vaccine Company LLC
- Respondent Agency
- Department of the Army
- Contracting Agency
- U.S. Army Medical Research Acquisition Activity
- Contract Number
- DAMDl 7-98-C-8024
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
- Sauer IncorporatedNo. 62302, 62303December 18, 2024
- Platinum Services, Inc.No. 62199, 62200August 1, 2024
- Modus Operandi, Inc.No. 62639August 30, 2023
- The Boeing CompanyNo. 63360-ADRApril 6, 2023
- Advanced Technologies Group, Inc.No. 59986, 61092November 18, 2020
- Al Arrab Contracting Co., Ltd.No. 58493, 58877November 4, 2020
Same Year
- Lawn Legends LLCNo. 59078December 30, 2015
- Soluciones Especializadas de Transporte S.A.No. 58579December 29, 2015
- First Transit, Inc.No. 59700December 22, 2015
- Xerox CorporationNo. 60117December 22, 2015
- EMTA Insaat A.S.No. 60031December 18, 2015
- Soap Creek Marina, LLCNo. 59445December 18, 2015
Same Issue
- Scot Cardillo dba Engineers Tooling SupportNo. 61612September 22, 2026
- Wild Hare Haulers, LLCNo. 64596, 64597, 64598September 15, 2026
- Hensel Phelps Construction CompanyNo. 64327September 14, 2026
- Bahadir Construction Engineering Contracting & Trading Inc. Co. and Impreza Costruzioni Giuseppe Maltauro S.p. A Joint VentureNo. 64038, 64336, 64428September 9, 2026
- VAE, Inc.No. 64437, 64464, 64465September 9, 2026
- Dubai Pearl CompanyNo. 64444August 26, 2026