## Facts

- U.S. Marine, Inc. (USM) developed a military boat design (Mark V) and supplied design information to VT Halter Marine, Inc. (VT Halter).
- VT Halter contracted with the U.S. Navy to develop prototypes, including one based on USM’s design.
- VT Halter submitted drawings and technical data to the Navy bearing a “limited-rights” legend under defense procurement data-rights regulations and contract clauses.
- Years later, the Navy disclosed the marked technical data to third parties participating in a joint venture to improve the Mark V design, without USM’s or VT Halter’s consent.
- USM asserted the disclosure enabled others to use its proprietary design information and sought damages from the United States.

## Issues

1. Whether a claim alleging the Navy wrongfully disclosed limited-rights technical data is a tort claim cognizable under the Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA) or a contract-based claim within the Tucker Act.
2. Whether the government’s alleged duty not to disclose arose independently from state trade-secret law or from procurement contracts and technical-data regulations governing limited-rights legends.

## Decision

- The Federal Circuit treated the claim as fundamentally contractual rather than a freestanding tort.
- The court concluded the government’s alleged nondisclosure duty derived from the contract/regulatory technical-data rights framework under which the data was furnished.
- Because the claim sounded in contract, jurisdiction lay in the Court of Federal Claims under the Tucker Act rather than in district court under the FTCA.
- The Federal Circuit’s disposition effectively maintained the transfer/posture placing the dispute in the Court of Federal Claims.

## Legal Principles

- A claim against the United States “sounds in contract,” not tort, when the asserted duty and limitations on government use or disclosure arise from procurement contracts and incorporated technical-data rights regulations.
- The FTCA cannot be used to obtain district-court jurisdiction by labeling as tortious misappropriation what is, in substance, a dispute over contractual or regulatory data-rights obligations.
- Where Tucker Act contract jurisdiction applies, the Court of Federal Claims is the proper forum for damages claims exceeding $10,000 founded on contracts, regulations, or implied-in-fact obligations.

## Conclusion

The court held that alleged wrongful disclosure of limited-rights technical data obtained through a government procurement relationship is a contract-based dispute governed by the Tucker Act, requiring adjudication in the Court of Federal Claims rather than an FTCA tort action in district court.


U.S. Marine, Inc. v. United States, 722 F.3d 1360 (Fed. Cir. 2013)