VESEQU LLC
VESEQU LLC appealed a contracting officer's termination-for-convenience settlement determination under a contract for web-based subscriptions, publications, and periodicals. The Board denied the appeal because VESEQU did not prove, using its standard record keeping system and with sufficient certainty, that it incurred a loss greater than the amended settlement amount.
Material Facts
- DLA awarded VESEQU a contract for VESEQU to acquire and make available 30 web-based subscriptions, publications, and periodicals.
- The contract included a termination for convenience clause under FAR 52.212-4(l).
- S&P and Bloomberg insisted that the government sign master service agreements, and VESEQU unsuccessfully attempted to negotiate license terms.
- Disputes arose concerning the required Benchmark subscription and whether Project Blue services were required on a per-subscription or per-material basis.
- The contracting officer issued a Stop Work Order concerning the cancelled subscriptions on October 27, 2025.
- VESEQU's Cost Summary, request for equitable adjustment, and Substantiating Documentation asserted that VESEQU had spent 760 hours on the cancelled subscriptions.
- VESEQU did not provide evidence from the internal time-tracking system it identified as the source of its claimed hours.
- The discovery crosswalk allocated some claimed work to activities across the full contract and to non-cancelled subscriptions.
- VESEQU did not submit the Bucket C Time Ledger to the Board.
- The contracting officer's amended settlement determination calculated 69.75 hours and used an $85 hourly rate.
Parties
- Appellant
- VESEQU LLC
- Respondent Agency
- Defense Logistics Agency Strategic Materials
- Contracting Agency
- Defense Logistics Agency Strategic Materials
- Contract Number
- SP8000-25-C-0005
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
- Procal Electric, Inc.No. 63580-ADROctober 2, 2026
- PDO Ahuska Joint Venture LLCNo. 64164July 13, 2026
- First Street Contractors, LLCNo. 64028June 10, 2026
- VESEQU LLCNo. 64468May 21, 2026
- First Street Contractors, LLCNo. 64028February 20, 2026
- Watts Constructors, LLCNo. 63753January 15, 2026
Same Year
- Bodell Construction CompanyNo. 63517-ADR, 63850-ADROctober 2, 2026
- Procal Electric, Inc.No. 63580-ADROctober 2, 2026
- Africa Transport Logistics CompanyNo. 64120October 1, 2026
- Kearfott CorporationNo. 64328October 1, 2026
- Relyant Global, LLCNo. 64606October 1, 2026
- Relyant Global, LLCNo. 64651October 1, 2026
Same Issue
- Scot Cardillo dba Engineers Tooling SupportNo. 61612September 22, 2026
- Peritia LLCNo. 64495, 64586August 20, 2026
- Gibraltar-Caddell, a Joint VentureNo. 64379July 13, 2026
- VESEQU LLCNo. 64468May 21, 2026
- Northcon, Inc.No. 64343, 64417April 1, 2026
- Wolverine Tube, Inc.No. 63877March 25, 2026