The Boeing Company
The Boeing Company appealed contracting officer final decisions concerning proprietary markings placed on non-commercial technical data delivered with unlimited rights under EPAWSS contracts. After remand from the Federal Circuit, the parties settled, and the Board dismissed the appeals with prejudice.
Material Facts
- The Air Force awarded Boeing Delivery Order 0138 under the Indefinite Delivery Indefinite Quantity Eagle TALON Contract for the Technology Maturation and Risk Reduction phase of the EPAWSS program.
- The Air Force separately awarded Boeing a contract for the Engineering and Manufacturing Development phase of the EPAWSS program.
- Boeing submitted numerous non-commercial technical data deliverables to the Air Force with unlimited rights.
- Boeing marked the technical data with a proprietary marking to notify third parties that Boeing retained rights in the data.
- The Air Force issued contracting officer final decisions directing removal of the disputed legend as a nonconforming legend under DFARS 252.227-7013.
- The Federal Circuit reversed the Board's denial of summary judgment, vacated the final decision denying Boeing's appeals, and remanded for further proceedings.
- The parties entered into a mutual release and settlement agreement addressing the use of a permissible third-party legend and the parties' claims concerning the disputed legend.
Parties
- Appellant
- The Boeing Company
- Respondent Agency
- U.S. Department of the Air Force
- Contracting Agency
- Air Force
- Contract Number
- F33657-01-D-0026
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
- Korte Construction CompanyNo. 63539, 63540September 30, 2026
- Dubai Pearl CompanyNo. 64444August 26, 2026
- U.S. Aeroteam, Inc.No. 61972, 61973August 6, 2026
- J. Star Enterprises, Inc.No. 63627, 63647, 63656, 63657, 63658June 10, 2026
- J. Star Enterprises, Inc.No. 63603June 9, 2026
- Vectrus Systems CorporationNo. 63420May 11, 2026
Same Year
- KiewitPhelpsNo. 61184December 30, 2022
- Wright Brothers, the Building Company, Eagle LLCNo. 62285December 30, 2022
- Bhayana Brothers LLCNo. 63377December 23, 2022
- GMA-AVM Joint VentureNo. 63254December 21, 2022
- Global Technical SystemsNo. 63296December 21, 2022
- Fluor Intercontinental, Inc.No. 63182December 16, 2022
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