should await resolution of all of Morganti’s payment claims. D. Morganti’s Breach of Contract Claims The court now turns to Morganti’s breach of contract claims. A contractor’s failure to perform may be excused and a termination for default converted to a termination for the convenience of the government if the contractor can establish that the government materially breached the contract. Alliant Techsystems, Inc. v. United States, 178 F.3d 1260, 1276 (Fed.Cir.1999); Malone v. United States, 849 F.2d 1441, 1445 (Fed. Cir.1988). Not every departure from the literal terms of a contract is sufficient to be “material.” Stone Forest Indus., Inc. v. United States, 973 F.2d 1548, 1550 (Fed.Cir. 1992); Consumers Oil Co., ASBCA No. 24172, 86-1 BCA ¶ 18,647, at 93,713, 1985 WL 17314 (1985) (<HOLDING>). The Federal Circuit has held that whether a
holding that a cardinal change provides the contractor with a legal right to avoid the contract discharges the contractors duty to perform and relieves the contractor of the default termination and its consequences recognizing that a construction contract implicitly imposes a duty on contractors to perform work according to the standard of due care holding plaintiff not required to perform its residual contract obligations after defendants material breach holding only a material breach discharges contractors duty to perform holding that whether failure to make progress or other payments is material depends upon the seriousness of the breach and its impact on the contractors ability to perform