not a lawyer, appeared pro se. I There is nothing in the CDA which prohibits the use of the contracting officer’s findings and conclusions as evidence in a subsequent de novo proceeding. See Lathan Co. v. United States, 20 Cl.Ct. 122, 125 (1990) (“This court may weigh the [contracting officer’s] findings and conclusions as it would any other evidence.”) (Rader, J.). The mere fact that the contracting officer’s decision is nonbinding on appeal to the Claims Court does not mean that it has no evidentiary value. The Supreme Court has held that nonbinding agency findings can be considered as evidence of the ultimate matters at issue in subsequent de novo proceedings. See Universal Camera Corp. v. National Labor Relations Bd., 340 U.S. 474, 493-94, 71 S.Ct. 456, 467-68, 95 L.Ed. 456 (1951) (<HOLDING>). The contracting officer, administering the
holding that trial courts resolution of disputed facts are conclusive on appeal when supported by substantial evidence holding that a reviewing court has the power to reject the findings and conclusions of the trial court where the findings are not supported by the evidence holding that the trial courts factual findings related to alimony will be upheld on appeal if supported by   any evidence   holding that the nonbinding findings of an nlrb trial examiner may be considered in a subsequent appeal to establish whether an employees removal was supported by substantial evidence holding that findings by the trial judge are considered binding on appeal when supported by adequate substantial and credible evidence