United States Federal Circuit

In this case, plaintiff sued the Government to satisfy the debts owed by Open Range Communications, Inc., with whom plaintiff was subcontracted. Summary judgment in favor of the Government is affirmed, where: 1) no genuine issue of material fact was raised as to the government's intent to bind itself to plaintiff; 2) plaintiff asks that the government incur liability because it spoke to the individuals in charge of the failing project in an attempt to fix the problems, but the absurd result of attaching liability in these circumstances is that almost any subcontractor over which the government exerts meaningful oversight and whose work is funded indirectly by the government would be a third party beneficiary of the government's contract with the prime contractor; and 3) the Government and Open Range did not intend that plaintiff be legally entitled to directly benefit from their contract, and so plaintiff is not a third party beneficiary to the contract.

Appellate Information

• Decided 03/06/2015
• Published 03/06/2015

Judges

• Prost

Court

• United States Federal Circuit

Counsel