With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". These are two distinct claims, requiring separate proofs. 35 . Plaintiff’s contention that the record contains evidence of a viable claim concerning the thickness of a concrete slab that it was required to remove lacks merit. While the evidence in the record demonstrates that plaintiff advised the Coast Guard of the issue, Pl.'s Supp'l App. 78-79, and that the excessive slab thickness had "impacted” it, id. at 79, there is no evidence that plaintiff actually requested an increase in the contract price or a time extension to compensate it for the additional work that was required. In other words, plaintiff never submitted a claim to the contracting officer, as required by the CDA. See 41 U.S.C. § 605(a); Reflectone, Inc. v. Dalton, 60 F.3d 1572, 1576 (Fed.Cir.1995) (en banc) (<HOLDING>). Such a claim is a jurisdictional prerequisite

A: holding that the federal acquisition regulation far requires a claim to be a written demand seeking a sum certain  as a matter of right
B: holding that plaintiffs cannot cover all the bases by having one shareholder make a demand and another allege demand futility spiegel requires shareholders to choose either to make demand or attempt to establish demand futility
C: holding that the offense requires that the return be false as to a material matter
D: holding that a defendant has a constitutional right to counsel as a matter of right on direct appeal
A.