Raytheon Company
Raytheon Company appealed the contracting officer's denial of claims for additional Systems Engineering and Program Management services under a firm-fixed-price Lot 27 contract. The Board held that the government could assert an unclean-hands affirmative defense without first submitting that defense to the contracting officer and granted the government's motion to amend its answer, while allowing Raytheon additional discovery and record submissions.
Material Facts
- The Lot 27 contract was a firm-fixed-price contract for missiles, telemetry units, other deliverables, and SEPM services.
- Raytheon appealed the contracting officer's denial of claims for extra and additional SEPM services.
- The government moved to amend its answer approximately two months before the scheduled hearing.
- The proposed affirmative defense alleged that Raytheon participated in unfunded contract actions and that its claims were barred under the unclean-hands doctrine.
- Raytheon asserted that Air Force personnel had consistently claimed that the Lot 27 contract was fully funded.
- Raytheon asserted that it would need discovery, complex funding and budget inquiries, and expert evidence to address the proposed defense.
- The government stated that recent depositions of Raytheon personnel had revealed an undisclosed pre-award plan concerning future appropriated funds.
- The Board did not extend the hearing commencement date but permitted further discovery and record submissions.
Parties
- Appellant
- Raytheon Company
- Respondent Agency
- Air Force
- Contracting Agency
- Air Force
- Contract Number
- FA8675-13-C-0003
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
- Pratt & Whitney, a division of Raytheon Technologies CompanyNo. 59222November 22, 2021
- Raytheon CompanyNo. 58212, 58753June 14, 2021
- Raytheon CompanyNo. 58841June 14, 2021
- Raytheon CompanyNo. 58842June 14, 2021
- Raytheon Company and Raytheon Missile SystemsNo. 59439, 59440, 59441June 14, 2021
- Raytheon Company and Raytheon Missile SystemsNo. 60699June 14, 2021
Same Year
- AT&T Corp.No. 61868December 21, 2018
- Gilbane Federal Joint VentureNo. 61590December 21, 2018
- WIT Associates, Inc.No. 61547December 19, 2018
- Avis Industries, Inc.No. 61609December 19, 2018
- Tetra Tech Tesoro, Inc.No. 61209, 61210, 61211, 61212 61213, 61214December 19, 2018
- J.F. Brennan Co., Inc.No. 60737December 19, 2018
Same Issue
- Procal Electric, Inc.No. 63580-ADROctober 2, 2026
- Kearfott CorporationNo. 64328October 1, 2026
- Relyant Global, LLCNo. 64606October 1, 2026
- Relyant Global, LLCNo. 64651October 1, 2026
- Korte Construction CompanyNo. 63539, 63540September 30, 2026
- GiaMed Alliance JV, LLCNo. 64484September 29, 2026