L3Harris Lawsuit: FCA Settlements, ITAR Fines, and ERISA Claims

L3Harris Technologies and its predecessor companies have paid more than $253 million across nearly 100 enforcement actions and settlements since 2000, and the L3Harris lawsuits on record run from False Claims Act fraud cases and export control violations to employment discrimination, ERISA, whistleblower retaliation, and commercial contract disputes.¹ The largest liabilities cluster around defense contracting fraud, but recent years have also brought appellate rulings against the company in disability discrimination cases and an active $77.9 million dispute with satellite subcontractor Moog. Many of the older cases came in through acquisitions, including ITT Corporation, Aerojet Rocketdyne, and The Titan Corporation, whose legal exposure traveled with them into the merged company formed in June 2019.²

False Claims Act Settlements Over Defense Contracts

Government contracting fraud is the single largest area of financial liability. Eight recorded False Claims Act actions against L3Harris and its predecessors total more than $133 million.¹

$62 Million Defective Pricing Settlement (2025)

On May 22, 2025, L3 Technologies Inc. agreed to pay $62 million to resolve allegations that it violated the False Claims Act and the Truth in Negotiations Act. The Justice Department alleged the company’s Utah-based Communications System West division failed to disclose accurate cost and pricing data when bidding on sole-source contracts for Remote Operations Video Enhanced Receivers (ROVER), Video-Oriented Transceivers for Exchange of Information (VORTEX), and Soldier Intelligence, Surveillance, and Reconnaissance (SIR) receivers sold to the Air Force, Army, Navy, and other agencies.³

According to the DOJ, L3 falsely certified in dozens of proposals that it had provided accurate data on labor, material, and manufacturing costs, preventing the government from negotiating fair prices. The alleged conduct ran from October 2006 through February 2014. The settlement resolved the allegations without any determination of liability.³

$21.8 Million Double-Charging Settlement (2023)

Two years earlier, the same division paid roughly $21.8 million to settle allegations that it double-charged the Department of Defense for low-value common parts such as nuts, bolts, and screws. The DOJ alleged L3 included these costs in a broad “Material Additive Factor” built into contract proposals while listing the same parts as separate line items on bills of materials. The affected proposals, submitted between 2008 and 2011, covered the same ROVER and VORTEX devices at the center of the later settlement.⁴⁵

Earlier FCA Actions

Other notable settlements in this category include a $25.6 million payment by L-3 Communications in 2015, a $9 million settlement by Aerojet Rocketdyne in 2022 before its acquisition by L3Harris, and smaller settlements involving L-3 Vertex Aerospace and Pratt & Whitney Rocketdyne dating back to 2008.⁶

Export Control Violations

ITT Night-Vision Case ($100 Million, 2007)

The highest-profile criminal case in the L3Harris corporate lineage predates the merger. In March 2007, ITT Corporation, later absorbed through acquisitions, pleaded guilty to two felony counts of illegally exporting classified military night-vision technology. ITT admitted to sharing sensitive design data for enhanced night-vision goggles with contractors in China, Singapore, and the United Kingdom to cut manufacturing costs, using a front company to circumvent federal export controls.⁷⁸

The total penalty came to $100 million: a $2 million criminal fine, $28 million in forfeiture, $20 million paid to the State Department, and $50 million in restitution that could be offset dollar-for-dollar if ITT invested in developing advanced night-vision technology for the U.S. military. Prosecutors called it the largest conviction of a major military contractor for arms export violations at the time.⁹

$13 Million ITAR Settlement (2019)

In September 2019, the State Department’s Directorate of Defense Trade Controls entered a $13 million consent agreement with L3Harris over 131 alleged violations of the Arms Export Control Act and the International Traffic in Arms Regulations. The violations occurred between 2013 and early 2019 under predecessor Harris Corporation and involved unauthorized exports of tactical radios, military electronics, remote-controlled vehicles, and night-vision equipment. Half of the penalty could be suspended if L3Harris invested the funds in compliance improvements.¹⁰ The Defense Department had first notified Harris of the issues in 2015, yet violations continued for several years after that notice.¹¹

Employment Discrimination Cases

Enforcement records show 45 employment-related penalty records against L3Harris totaling roughly $9 million, mostly for wage and hour violations.¹ Two recent appellate rulings show the kinds of disability discrimination claims moving through the courts.

Jenny v. L3Harris (Tenth Circuit, 2025)

David Jenny, a Senior Director of International Business Development employed by the company and its predecessors since 1992, sued under the ADA and the Rehabilitation Act after being fired. Jenny suffered from recurring cellulitis aggravated by air travel and had received an approved accommodation for extra-legroom seating. He alleged that within months of the approval, his supervisors disparaged his disability, denied his international travel requests, reorganized him out of his leadership role, and terminated him.¹²

A Utah district court granted summary judgment to L3Harris, finding that while Jenny had shown the company’s stated reason for the firing was pretextual, he hadn’t sufficiently connected the termination to his disability. On July 21, 2025, the Tenth Circuit reversed and sent the case back for trial, pointing to what it called a “pattern of discriminatory conduct,” an “opaque” reorganization, and “shifting explanations” for the termination as evidence sufficient for a jury.¹³¹⁴

Lee v. L3Harris (Ninth Circuit, 2023)

Preston Lee, a former painter for L3Harris in Hawaii, alleged he was fired because of his PTSD rather than for a workplace argument that had occurred months earlier. A trial court initially sided with the company. In August 2023, a Ninth Circuit panel reinstated Lee’s ADA claim, finding a reasonable jury could conclude L3Harris’s handling of the incident was “dispositively affected by stereotypical thinking about persons with PTSD.” The case was remanded for further proceedings.¹⁴

ERISA Class Action Over 401(k) Fees

In March 2022, eight former employees filed a class action in the Middle District of Florida alleging L3Harris breached its fiduciary duties under ERISA by mismanaging the L3 Technologies Master Savings Plan, which held about $5.2 billion in assets. The plaintiffs claimed the company failed to negotiate lower recordkeeping fees and kept expensive investment options in the plan lineup going back to 2015. A class of roughly 50,000 plan participants was certified in June 2023.¹⁵

After the court denied L3Harris’s motion to dismiss and set a bench trial for early 2024, the parties mediated. The final approved settlement was $650,000, covering more than 40,000 participants, with the court awarding roughly $288,000 in attorneys’ fees. The court described the modest sum as reflecting L3Harris’s “strenuous arguments” that participants had not been harmed by the plan’s investment choices.¹⁵¹⁶

Whistleblower Retaliation Settlement (2025)

In December 2025, L3Harris settled a retaliation lawsuit brought by Ryan Johnsen, a former operations manager at an L3Harris weather center. Johnsen alleged he was fired for reporting another employee’s potentially dangerous conduct and brought claims under the False Claims Act and the National Defense Authorization Act’s whistleblower protections. A notice of settlement was filed in the Middle District of Florida; terms were not publicly disclosed.¹⁷

Commercial Litigation: L3Harris v. Moog

In March 2024, L3Harris sued Moog Inc. in the Middle District of Florida over a $77.9 million subcontract for satellite buses and software. L3Harris alleged Moog delivered the satellite hardware 11 to 13 months late and that the delivered units contained defects that “created the potential for catastrophic loss” to satellites built for the Space Development Agency and a classified government customer. L3Harris claimed the delays damaged its credibility with its government clients and put future business at risk.¹⁸

Moog denied the allegations and filed counterclaims. L3Harris moved to strike them.¹⁹ As of May 2025, the case remained in discovery.²⁰

Government Contract Protests

L3Harris has also gone to court as a plaintiff challenging contract awards it lost. In September 2023, NASA awarded Ball Aerospace a $486.9 million contract for the GeoXO Sounder weather satellite instrument. L3Harris protested to the Government Accountability Office, arguing NASA’s evaluation was unreasonable because L3Harris scored higher on technical merits (600 out of 750, versus Ball’s 563) but lost on cost, with its bid of $764.9 million significantly exceeding Ball’s. L3Harris also raised concerns that the director of NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center had previously been a Ball Aerospace executive.²¹

The GAO denied the protest in December 2023, finding NASA’s cost analysis was well-documented and that the Goddard director had no involvement in the procurement. L3Harris then filed a sealed protest at the U.S. Court of Federal Claims in January 2024. That challenge was dismissed as well.²²²³

1
Good Jobs First. L3Harris Technologies Violation Tracker
2
L3Harris Technologies. Our History
3
U.S. Department of Justice. L3 Technologies Inc. Agrees to Pay $62,000,000 to Resolve False Claims Act Allegations
4
U.S. Department of Defense Office of Inspector General. L3 Technologies Settles False Claims Act Allegations Relating to Double Charging
5
Whistleblower LLC. L3 Technologies Inc. Settles False Claims Act Case
6
Good Jobs First. L3Harris Technologies Violation Tracker — Sorted by Year
7
NBC News. ITT to Pay $100 Million in Export Case
8
U.S. Department of Justice. ITT Corporation to Plead Guilty to Illegally Exporting Defense Technology
9
The New York Times. Military Contractor to Pay $100 Million Over Exports
10
U.S. Department of State. U.S. Department of State Concludes $13 Million Settlement of Alleged Export Violations by L3Harris Technologies
11
FreightWaves. L3Harris Will Pay $13 Million Fine for Export Violations
12
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit. Jenny v. L3Harris Technologies Inc., No. 24-4032
13
SHRM. ADA Claim Involving Denied Travel Requests Proceeds to Trial
14
Justia. Jenny v. L3Harris Technologies Inc., No. 24-4032
15
Bloomberg Law. L3Harris Workers Finalize $650,000 Retirement Plan Settlement
16
Pensions & Investments. L3Harris Technologies to Settle 401(k) Lawsuit for $650,000
17
Bloomberg Law. L3Harris Technologies Settles Ex-Employee’s Retaliation Suit
18
SpaceNews. Suppliers Struggle as Military Embraces Small Satellites
19
Law360. L3Harris Rips Moog’s Counterclaims in $78M Contract Suit
20
CaseMine. L3Harris Technologies Inc. v. Moog Inc., Order
21
SpaceNews. GAO Denies L3Harris Protest Over Ball Aerospace Weather Satellite Instrument Contract
22
Washington Technology. L3Harris Takes Fight Over $500M Contract to Court
23
Law360. Claims Court Tosses L3Harris Protest to $544M Satellite Deal