with, a contractor arising under ... the Contract Disputes Act of 1978 [41 U.S.C. §§ 601-615 (2006).], including a dispute concerning termination of a contract.” 28 U.S.C. § 1491(a)(2); see also 41 U.S.C. § 609(a) (“Except as provided in paragraph (2), and in lieu of appealing the decision of the contracting officer under section 605 of this title 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.”). An aggrieved contractor, however, must file a claim, with and receive a final decision from, the CO before it has standing to seek adjudication of a claim. Alliant Techsystems, Inc. v. United States, 178 F.3d 1260, 1267 (Fed.Cir.1999) (<HOLDING>) (quoting 28 U.S.C. § 1491(a)(2)). FAR
holding that the claims court has no jurisdiction under the tucker act over claims to social security benefits holding that when breach of contract claims present different factual and legal issues than a claim for improper default termination those claims must be separately presented and certified to a contracting officer under the cda recognizing that because subcontractor was not a contractor as defined in the cda there was no cda jurisdiction to consider its direct appeal holding that the tucker act gives the united states court of federal claims jurisdiction over cda claims only when a decision of the contracting officer has been issued under section 6 of the cda  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