Gaps in Contract Period Do Not Void Contracts Where Agency and Plaintiff Continued Performance Under Same Conditions; COFC No. 15-1555C, Seh Ahn Lee, et al. v. United States

Plaintiffs’ motion for reconsideration and motion to amend are denied, where the plaintiffs’ nonpersonal services contracts included the work requirements and conditions required by the agency during contract performance, and therefore the government did not require work outside the scope of the award nor breach the contract; and where lapses in the contract periods did not render the contracts void, because the agency and the plaintiffs continued working under the conditions stated in the original contract and therefore it may be inferred that the parties intended renewal of the contracts under the same terms for a similar period of time.