to an agency board, a contractor may bring an action directly on the claim in the United States Court of Federal Claims, notwithstanding any contract provision, regulation, or rule of law to the contrary.”). Under the CDA, an aggrieved contractor must exhaust its administrative remedies by filing a claim with, and receiving a final decision from, the contracting officer before it has standing to assert a claim in the United States Court of Federal Claims. See 41 U.S.C. § 605(a), (b) (The “contracting officer’s decision on the claim shall be final and conclusive and not subject to review by any forum, tribunal, or Government agency, unless an appeal or suit is timely commenced as authorized by this chapter.”); see also England v. The Swanson Group, 353 F.3d 1375, 1379 (Fed.Cir.2004) (<HOLDING>). A “claim” is defined by the Federal
holding that when the contracting officer modified the contract to name the contractors bank as payee the contracting officers actions demonstrated an express agreement to pay the bank holding that jurisdiction over an appeal of a contracting officers decision is lacking unless the contractors claim is first presented to the contracting officer and that officer renders a final decision on the claim holding that the contracting officer effectively made a final decision on the government claim for set off by declining to pay the contractor the balance due on the contract holding that court had jurisdiction over common law counts related to fca claim even though not presented to contracting officer holding that the united states court of federal claims does not have jurisdiction over a new claim or a claim of different scope that was not previously presented and certified to the contracting officer for decision