Riley & Ephriam Construction Co. v. United States
United States Court of Federal Claims
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
BASKIR, Judge.
We hereby GRANT Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment and dismiss Plaintiffs Complaint. We find that Plaintiff received the contracting officer’s (CO) final decision via fax on November 27, 2001, and via certified letter to its Post Office (PO) box on November 30, 2001. Plaintiffs instant action, filed in January of 2003, is thus time-barred by the Contract Dispute Act’s (CDA) 12-month statute of limitations.
BACKGROUND
As demonstrated by the parties’ briefs and confirmed by counsel during oral argument, the facts giving rise to this jurisdictional issue are undisputed.…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Pathman Construction Company, Inc. v. The United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1987
- The Borough of Alpine v. The United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1991
- Stevens Shipping & Terminal Co. v. JAPAN RAINBOW II MVCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 2003
- Schultz v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1955
- Hamza v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 1996
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- Riley & Ephriam Construction Co. v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2005