US Federal Circuit Court of Appeals Lawyers, Bid Protest & Claims Appellate Attorney Washington DC

Nationwide Government Contracts Appellate Help. Call 1-866-601-5518 for a FREE Initial Consultation.

CAFC US Federal Circuit Court of Appeals Lawyers Washington DCBy appearing before the Washington DC Federal Circuit Court of Appeals (CAFC), Watson & Associates’ government contract law appellate attorneys help contractors to diligently pursue what appeared to be an erroneous decision from the trial court, usually the U.S. Court of Federal Claims.

As Federal Circuit Court of Appeals lawyers, we understand the impact of losing out on revenues either during bid protests stages, contract claims denials or termination from doing business with the federal government. Our federal court lawyers offer.

  • Help for government contractors in All States
  • Hands-on substantive experience in the various contracting phases;
  • Appellate legal services for large contractors and small businesses; and
  • Competitive rates when compared to larger law firms.

Federal Circuit Court of Appeals Legal Representation for Government Contractors in ALL States.

  • Contract Disputes Act claims appeal
  • Bid Protest Appeals from the Court of Federal Claims
  • SBA & Small Business Appellate Cases
  • Contract Terminations
  • Procurement Fraud
  • SBA Decisions and SBA Office of Hearings and Appeals

COFC appeals: Given the massive undertaking, and by knowing the standard of review at this appeals court, our goal is to develop our appellate team and focus on getting results for our clients.  Federal Circuit Court of Appeals attorneys understand that the Court of Federal Claims in Washington DC may sometimes commit clear error in its bid protests decisions or Contract Disputes Act opinions.

Geographically positioned to help in all states: With law offices in Washington DC and Denver Colorado, our federal circuit court of appeals lawyers litigate a wide range of issues in government contract law. The law firm understands that prosecuting a case a the trial level can be considerably different than at the CAFC or any other court of appeals. Many federal government contractors sometimes take a chance by using a local contracts attorney to litigate government contracting matters. This can sometimes lead to disastrous results.

Experienced in various government contracting areas: When litigating at the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, not only does your appellate lawyer have to know the substantive areas of government procurement but the attorney should have some idea of congressional policy and statutes at the higher level. Federal Circuit judges also look at these arguments to help them decide whether Court of Federal Claims (COFC) may have issued a decision in error.

Small Business Federal Circuit Court of Appeals Lawyer

At Watson, we litigate issues related to small business programs (decided at the SBA Office of Hearings and Appeals (OHA)). This includes small business size appeal decisions, affiliation concerns, SBA certificate of competency decisions at the COFC level.  Our federal appellate lawyers also litigate appellate cases involving HUBZone Program matters, post-award and pre-award bid protest decisions affecting small business set-asides.

COFC Bid Protests Federal Circuit Court Appeal

When the Court of Federal Claims makes a final ruling in bid protests, the might be some level of legal error in the decision. To overturn the COFC decision, a government contractor will have to appeal the decision to the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals. This process requires the appellate attorney to completely review any proceedings at the lower court level.

A detailed review of trial history: As one of the top appellate law firms for government contracts, Watson & Associates, our Washington DC and Colorado-based Federal Circuit Court of Appeals attorneys understand the seriousness of appellate advocacy. We look to see if the bid protest of awarded federal contracts was litigated at the Government Accountability Office (GAO) and look into any subsequent government contract protests filed at the Court of Federal Claims. When the COFC makes an adverse decision in favor of the government’s motion for judgment on the administrative record (AMJAR), our US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit lawyers step in to assess the merits of an appeal to the Court of Appeal.

Federal Government Contract Disputes Act Claims Appellate Attorney

Government contractors may litigate a case at the trial court level (Court of Federal Claims or Board of Contract Appeal) only to find that the court issued an unfavorable decision. Our appellate attorneys will assess the merits of the decision and provide legal advice on whether filing an appeal would have any merit.

The law firm frequently litigates construction claims and service contractor claims at the various boards of contract appeals and can help clients to appeal their cases. We handle Contract Disputes Act Claims from the contracting officer’s final decision all the way up to appeal to the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit.

Important Decisions

Agility Def. & Gov’t Svcs., 115 Fed. Cl. 247 (2014). Firm – Fixed Price Contracts FAR 16.201, cited by the Court, which noted that “this contract places upon the contractor maximum risk and full responsibility for all costs and resulting profit or loss.”

Agility Public Warehousing Co. KSCP, FKA Public Warehousing Co. K.S.C. v. Mattis, No. 2016-1265 (Apr. 4, 2017) (affirms ASBCA’s decision that Government did not breach the express terms of the contract but remands case to ASBCA to consider contractor’s claims for constructive change and breach of the implied duty to cooperate)

Agility Defense & Government Services, Inc. v. United States, No. 2016-1068 (Feb. 6, 2017) (contrary to CoFC’s findings, evidence supported contractor’s contentions that: (i) Government had provided inadequate or negligent estimate, and (ii) contractor had relied on the faulty estimates)

Rocky Mountain Helium LLC v. United States, No. 2016-1278 (Nov. 16, 2016) (affirms CoFC’s holding that suit challenging 2004 termination of helium extraction contract is untimely under six year limitations period of 28 U.S.C. 2501; reverses CoFC’s holding that Settlement Agreement was not “money-mandating” under Tucker Act and, therefore, that CoFC lacked jurisdiction over claim for breach of it)

Pacific Gas and Electric Co., et al., v. United States, No. 2015-5082 (Oct. 3, 2016) (affirms CoFC’s dismissal of breach of contract suit because plaintiffs do not have privity of contract with Government and, therefore, lack standing)

Guardian Moving Storage v. United States, No. 2015-5132 (Aug. 22, 2016) (nonprecedential; affirms prior CoFC decision; government contract protests against corrective action was based on flawed assumption that protester’s proposal was acceptable and that no corrective action was necessary) 

Zafer Taahhut Insaat ve Ticaret A.S. v. United States, No. 2015-5083 (Aug. 17, 2016) (affirms CoFC decision; no evidence Government denied request for time extension, which is a required element of constructive acceleration claim, and contractor failed to establish Government’s negotiations with Pakistan to re-open one contract route amounted to fault on the part of the Government establishing a constructive change)

Call Watson’s US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit Attorneys for Immediate Help

If your company is contemplating filing an appeal to the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, there is limited time. Call one of the top appellate law firms for federal contracts. Contact the government contract appellate attorneys at Watson & Associates, LLC. Free initial consultation. 1-866-601-5518.