Today, Beth Ferrell and Justin Ganderson published an excellent article in Law360 about the Federal Circuit’s recent Scott Timber II decision and the contractor’s combined petition for panel rehearing and rehearing en banc. Their article explores the potential impact of Scott Timber II on the longstanding government contracting principle: the duty to cooperate. Prior to the Federal Circuit issuing Precision Pine in 2010, the government contracts community relied upon the well-established principle that a breach of the duty to cooperate or not to hinder was reviewed under a “reasonableness” test. Precision Pine changed the game, as the Federal Circuit opted for a more stringent “specifically targeted” test, which essentially added a scienter requirement. In Scott Timber II, the Federal Circuit appeared to reinforce the “specifically targeted” test in certain instances (e.g., where a suspension of performance occurs to comply with a court order), but left the door open for the reasonable test in other instances (e.g., where a suspension of performance occurs after a court order requiring the suspension expires). Clear? Not really. As advocated in Beth’s and Justin’s article: “Hopefully, the Federal Circuit will consider Scott’s combined petition for panel rehearing and rehearing en banc, and correct the confusion and alleviate the concern it created through Precision Pine and Scott Timber II. Passing on this opportunity to clarify this area of law would only exacerbate unnecessary uneasiness in the government contracting community.” Well said.