CBCA 8409

Aisha B. Kamara

Sep 18, 2026Judge O’RourkeDEPARTMENT OF STATE
DecisionGranted in part

Key Facts

Appellant
Aisha B. Kamara
Respondent agency
DEPARTMENT OF STATE
Judge
O’Rourke
Case number
CBCA 8409
Decided
Sep 18, 2026The decision states Sep 18, 2026 on its own face, which agrees with the listing.
Decision type
Decision
Law firm for the appellant
The decision's own appearances block names no outside firm, which happens when the appellant appeared pro se, through one of its own officers, or through its in-house counsel.
Outcome
Granted in part
GRANTED IN PART
Read from the shouted disposition line the Board prints above this decision's own date, and quoted from that line, because the decision's text states no operative ruling we could isolate. No model is involved.

Topics

Payment and interestSmall claims and accelerated procedureCosts and quantumProcedure and sanctions

Topics are derived from each decision's own text by keyword rules, not a classification by the Board. A decision matching several topics carries all of them, so topic counts sum above the number of decisions. They are ordered strongest first.

Appearances

For the appellant (pro se)
Aisha B. Kamara
Washington, DC
For the respondent
Alexandra N. Wilson
Office of the Legal Adviser, Buildings and Acquisitions, Department of State
Washington, DC
Decision PDF (cbca.gov) Civilian Board of Contract Appeals, Contract Disputes Act casesThe Board's year listing this row was read fromThe decision document is hosted by the Board itself, so it is an official copy, and the Board's own Contract Disputes Act case listing is the citable source. The topics, the disposition and the appearances above are read deterministically from the decision's own words; no model is involved.

Research This Decision

Create a free account to open this decision in the CBCA workspace: a grounded decision brief drafted from the Board's own words, the Insights dashboard over the whole corpus, and the filtered browser.

CBCA Decision Brief

A Workflows Hub brief on this decision, drafted from the captured text with every quote and authority checked against it.

Insights

Who prevails before the Board, by topic and by judge, with every denominator visible: merits rulings, not decisions.

Browse with Filters

The whole corpus by year, decision type, topic, judge and disposition, searchable across the decisions' own text.

Full Decision

Full text of the decision2 pages, 2,509 characters, read from the Board's own documentDecided Sep 18, 2026 on its own faceRespondent DEPARTMENT OF STATE Decision documentOfficial source: Civilian Board of Contract Appeals, Contract Disputes Act cases

Authorities cited

4 authorities read from this decision's own text, grouped by the body of law each comes from. Select one to read it at its publisher.

Read from the decision's own words with no model involved. Statutes, regulations, the acts these forums argue by name, and cases at the board, this office or the Comptroller General are recognized; any other citation form is left out rather than guessed at, so this is a floor on what the decision cites.

GRANTED IN PART: September 18, 2026

CBCA 8409

AISHA B. KAMARA,

Appellant,

v.

DEPARTMENT OF STATE,

Respondent.

The case caption as the decision prints it. Every word is kept; the rule the Board draws around it is not text, so it is not repeated here.

Aisha B. Kamara, pro se, Washington, DC.

Alexandra N. Wilson, Office of the Legal Adviser, Buildings and Acquisitions, Department of State, Washington, DC, counsel for Respondent.

O’ROURKE, Board Judge.

This decision on quantum in this small claims procedure case follows the Board’s earlier ruling on entitlement, which was issued to the parties under protective order on August 4, 2026. Aisha B. Kamara v. Department of State, CBCA 8409, slip op. (Aug. 4, 2026). In that decision, the Board granted in part appellant’s demand for reimbursement of costs incurred due to delays in shipping her personally owned vehicle from Saudi Arabia to the United States.

Since entitlement was granted only as to transportation costs and not as to any other expense categories for which appellant sought reimbursement, the amount of appellant’s claim had to be adjusted to reflect ten days of transportation costs. By Board order dated August 10, 2026, appellant was directed to identify ten days of rental car fees or other conveyance/transportation costs, along with substantiating data to support the revised amount of the claim.

On August 25, 2026, appellant filed with the Board evidence of transportation costs totaling $488.51. The Board reviewed the evidence and found that it adequately supported appellant’s revised claim and that the calculation was accurate. In addition, respondent had no objection to the revised amount of appellant’s claim or the data submitted in support of the same.

On August 31, 2026, the parties filed a joint status report stating that respondent reviewed the documentation submitted by appellant and accepted the quantification of damages of $488.51, as presented in appellant’s August 25, 2026, filing.

Decision

Having GRANTED IN PART appellant’s claim for entitlement and after reviewing the evidence of damages and the parties’ joint status report, we order respondent to pay to appellant $488.51, plus interest under the Contract Disputes Act (CDA), 41 U.S.C. § 7109 (2024), beginning on February 5, 2025 (the date of the contracting officer’s receipt of appellant’s claim), and running through the date of payment. Pursuant to 41 U.S.C. § 7106(b) and Board Rule 52 (48 CFR 6101.52 (published in eCFR)), this decision is final and conclusive, may not be set aside except for fraud, and has no value as precedent in future cases.

Kathleen J. O’Rourke

Board Judge

This is a verbatim capture of the text layer of the Board's own document in Aisha B. Kamara, CBCA 8409. Nothing is summarized or reworded, and the sections run in the order the Board wrote them. What the page shows and the text does not repeat is the pagination furniture: the page numbers and the rules the Board draws around its caption and under its signatures. The signatures are set back into the columns the Board prints them in, each judge under the name he or she signed, and the typed copy of that name the page carries beneath each signature is not repeated.

Related Decisions

Same Judge

Same Topic

Same Year

Newsletter

New decisions every Monday

GovConDash Weekly lists the decisions GAO, the boards, the courts and SBA OHA released that week, alongside the FAR Overhaul deviations and proposed rules that reach every contractor. Free.

Free, weekly, and one click to unsubscribe. We send a confirmation email first. See our Privacy Policy.