{"id":894559,"date":"2018-07-18T11:33:02","date_gmt":"2018-07-18T17:33:02","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/?p=894559"},"modified":"2018-07-18T11:33:02","modified_gmt":"2018-07-18T17:33:02","slug":"federal-court-california-holds-subcontractor-may-proceed-claim-delay-damages-despite-no-damage-delay-clause-changes-work-amount-implied-abandonment-sub","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/federal-court-california-holds-subcontractor-may-proceed-claim-delay-damages-despite-no-damage-delay-clause-changes-work-amount-implied-abandonment-sub\/","title":{"rendered":"Federal Court in California Holds That Subcontractor May Proceed With Claim for Delay Damages, Despite No-Damage-For-Delay Clause, Where Changes to the Work Amount to an Implied Abandonment of the Subcontract"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>John H. Conrad | <a href=\"https:\/\/www.lexology.com\/library\/detail.aspx?g=05614c5a-226e-4677-ae48-41cbcf8624e0\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">Pepper Hamilton LLP<\/a> | July 12, 2018<\/p>\n<p><strong><em>Rai Indus. Fabricators, LLC v. Fed. Ins. Co.<\/em>, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 74612 (N.D. Cal., May 2, 2018)<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Sauer Incorporated (\u201cSauer\u201d) contracted with the U.S. Army to design and construct the Operational Readiness Training Complex at Fort Hunter, California. Sauer subcontracted with Agate Steel, Inc. (\u201cAgate\u201d) for the erection of steel for the project. Agate\u2019s subcontract with Sauer contained a no-damage-for-delay clause, which generally provided that extensions of time were Agate\u2019s sole remedy for delay.<\/p>\n<p>According to Agate, the project suffered from substantial delays because of the acts and omissions of Sauer. In particular, Agate alleged that Sauer failed to properly coordinate the work of its subcontractors, failed to follow the project\u2019s schedules, failed to follow the subcontract\u2019s change order procedures, and made unanticipated changes to the project\u2019s scope and work flow sequence. Agate argued that these delays constituted a cardinal change and\/or abandonment of the subcontract, which rendered the no-damage-for-delay clause unenforceable. Agate sued Sauer for damages from the delays and disruptions to its work.<\/p>\n<p>Sauer moved to dismiss Agate\u2019s claim for delay and disruption damages. Relying on the subcontract\u2019s no-damage-for-delay clause, Sauer argued that Agate contractually waived its right to recover delay damages, and thus Agate had failed to state a claim on which relief can be granted. The district court denied Sauer\u2019s motion.<\/p>\n<p>In its decision, the court first noted that, in general, no-damage-for-delay clauses are valid and enforceable under California law, but, that such clauses are not an absolute bar to recovery. Instead, delay damages may still be recoverable where the delays are unreasonable under the circumstances, or where the parties have impliedly abandoned the contract. The court held that Agate alleged sufficient facts to support entitlement under either theory.<\/p>\n<p>First, the court held that the motion must be denied because Agate alleged sufficient facts to create a question of fact as to the reasonableness of the delays under the circumstances.<\/p>\n<p>As to abandonment, the court held that Agate alleged sufficient facts to support a finding that the parties impliedly abandoned the subcontract. Under California law, the parties may be held to impliedly abandon a contract where they fail to follow change order procedures and when the final product differs substantially from the original plan. Express intent to abandon is not required. The court found that Agate\u2019s allegations support a finding of abandonment. Specifically, Agate alleged that Sauer significantly changed the project drawings, which, in turn, required significant changes to Agate\u2019s scope of work; that Sauer furnished hundreds of defective steel pieces, which required significant field correction by Agate; and that Sauer failed to comply with the contract requirements for extra work. The court held that, at the pleading stage, these allegations are sufficient to support an implied abandonment of the subcontract, which would render the no-damage-for-delay clause unenforceable.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>John H. Conrad | Pepper Hamilton LLP | July 12, 2018 Rai Indus. Fabricators, LLC v. Fed. Ins. Co., 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 74612 (N.D. Cal., May 2, 2018) Sauer Incorporated (\u201cSauer\u201d) contracted with the U.S. Army to design and construct the Operational Readiness Training Complex at Fort Hunter, California. Sauer subcontracted with Agate Steel,&hellip; <a class=\"more-link\" href=\"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/federal-court-california-holds-subcontractor-may-proceed-claim-delay-damages-despite-no-damage-delay-clause-changes-work-amount-implied-abandonment-sub\/\">Continue reading <span class=\"screen-reader-text\">Federal Court in California Holds That Subcontractor May Proceed With Claim for Delay Damages, Despite No-Damage-For-Delay Clause, Where Changes to the Work Amount to an Implied Abandonment of the Subcontract<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":"","jetpack_publicize_message":"","jetpack_publicize_feature_enabled":true,"jetpack_social_post_already_shared":true,"jetpack_social_options":{"image_generator_settings":{"template":"highway","enabled":false},"version":2}},"categories":[9],"tags":[9895,3,526],"class_list":["post-894559","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-construction-contracts","tag-advise-consult","tag-insurance-claims","tag-no-damage-for-delay-provision","entry"],"jetpack_publicize_connections":[],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v25.0 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/wordpress\/plugins\/seo\/ -->\n<title>Federal Court in California Holds That Subcontractor May Proceed With Claim for Delay Damages, Despite No-Damage-For-Delay Clause, Where Changes to the Work Amount to an Implied Abandonment of the Subcontract - Advise &amp; Consult, Inc.<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"Agate\u2019s subcontract with Sauer contained a no-damage-for-delay clause, which generally provided that extensions of time were Agate\u2019s sole remedy for delay\" \/>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/federal-court-california-holds-subcontractor-may-proceed-claim-delay-damages-despite-no-damage-delay-clause-changes-work-amount-implied-abandonment-sub\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Federal Court in California Holds That Subcontractor May Proceed With Claim for Delay Damages, Despite No-Damage-For-Delay Clause, Where Changes to the Work Amount to an Implied Abandonment of the Subcontract - Advise &amp; Consult, Inc.\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Agate\u2019s subcontract with Sauer contained a no-damage-for-delay clause, which generally provided that extensions of time were Agate\u2019s sole remedy for delay\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/federal-court-california-holds-subcontractor-may-proceed-claim-delay-damages-despite-no-damage-delay-clause-changes-work-amount-implied-abandonment-sub\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Advise &amp; Consult, Inc.\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/Advise-Consult-Inc-126949043996790\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2018-07-18T17:33:02+00:00\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@adviseconsult\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@adviseconsult\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"2 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/federal-court-california-holds-subcontractor-may-proceed-claim-delay-damages-despite-no-damage-delay-clause-changes-work-amount-implied-abandonment-sub\/#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/federal-court-california-holds-subcontractor-may-proceed-claim-delay-damages-despite-no-damage-delay-clause-changes-work-amount-implied-abandonment-sub\/\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/0a11abe008083d5fb19c2b0feefe7bd7\"},\"headline\":\"Federal Court in California Holds That Subcontractor May Proceed With Claim for Delay Damages, Despite No-Damage-For-Delay Clause, Where Changes to the Work Amount to an Implied Abandonment of the Subcontract\",\"datePublished\":\"2018-07-18T17:33:02+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/federal-court-california-holds-subcontractor-may-proceed-claim-delay-damages-despite-no-damage-delay-clause-changes-work-amount-implied-abandonment-sub\/\"},\"wordCount\":510,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/#organization\"},\"keywords\":[\"Advise &amp; Consult\",\"Insurance Claims\",\"No-Damage-for-Delay Provision\"],\"articleSection\":[\"Construction Contracts\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/federal-court-california-holds-subcontractor-may-proceed-claim-delay-damages-despite-no-damage-delay-clause-changes-work-amount-implied-abandonment-sub\/#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/federal-court-california-holds-subcontractor-may-proceed-claim-delay-damages-despite-no-damage-delay-clause-changes-work-amount-implied-abandonment-sub\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/federal-court-california-holds-subcontractor-may-proceed-claim-delay-damages-despite-no-damage-delay-clause-changes-work-amount-implied-abandonment-sub\/\",\"name\":\"Federal Court in California Holds That Subcontractor May Proceed With Claim for Delay Damages, Despite No-Damage-For-Delay Clause, Where Changes to the Work Amount to an Implied Abandonment of the Subcontract - Advise &amp; Consult, Inc.\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2018-07-18T17:33:02+00:00\",\"description\":\"Agate\u2019s subcontract with Sauer contained a no-damage-for-delay clause, which generally provided that extensions of time were Agate\u2019s sole remedy for delay\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/federal-court-california-holds-subcontractor-may-proceed-claim-delay-damages-despite-no-damage-delay-clause-changes-work-amount-implied-abandonment-sub\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/\",\"name\":\"Advise &amp; Consult, Inc.\",\"description\":\"Construction Expert Witnesses\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/#organization\"},\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Advise & Consult\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/11\/AC-Red-Logo.png\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/11\/AC-Red-Logo.png\",\"width\":162,\"height\":75,\"caption\":\"Advise & Consult\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/Advise-Consult-Inc-126949043996790\/\",\"https:\/\/x.com\/adviseconsult\",\"https:\/\/www.linkedin.com\/company-beta\/204526\/\",\"https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/user\/MrConstructionExpert\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/0a11abe008083d5fb19c2b0feefe7bd7\",\"name\":\"admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/b01e71b7acadd7657af782b7ad1a30cc?s=96&d=mm&r=pg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/b01e71b7acadd7657af782b7ad1a30cc?s=96&d=mm&r=pg\",\"caption\":\"admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"http:\/\/www.expertwitnessinconstruction.com\"]}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Federal Court in California Holds That Subcontractor May Proceed With Claim for Delay Damages, Despite No-Damage-For-Delay Clause, Where Changes to the Work Amount to an Implied Abandonment of the Subcontract - Advise &amp; Consult, Inc.","description":"Agate\u2019s subcontract with Sauer contained a no-damage-for-delay clause, which generally provided that extensions of time were Agate\u2019s sole remedy for delay","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/federal-court-california-holds-subcontractor-may-proceed-claim-delay-damages-despite-no-damage-delay-clause-changes-work-amount-implied-abandonment-sub\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Federal Court in California Holds That Subcontractor May Proceed With Claim for Delay Damages, Despite No-Damage-For-Delay Clause, Where Changes to the Work Amount to an Implied Abandonment of the Subcontract - Advise &amp; Consult, Inc.","og_description":"Agate\u2019s subcontract with Sauer contained a no-damage-for-delay clause, which generally provided that extensions of time were Agate\u2019s sole remedy for delay","og_url":"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/federal-court-california-holds-subcontractor-may-proceed-claim-delay-damages-despite-no-damage-delay-clause-changes-work-amount-implied-abandonment-sub\/","og_site_name":"Advise &amp; Consult, Inc.","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/Advise-Consult-Inc-126949043996790\/","article_published_time":"2018-07-18T17:33:02+00:00","author":"admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@adviseconsult","twitter_site":"@adviseconsult","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"admin","Est. reading time":"2 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/federal-court-california-holds-subcontractor-may-proceed-claim-delay-damages-despite-no-damage-delay-clause-changes-work-amount-implied-abandonment-sub\/#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/federal-court-california-holds-subcontractor-may-proceed-claim-delay-damages-despite-no-damage-delay-clause-changes-work-amount-implied-abandonment-sub\/"},"author":{"name":"admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/0a11abe008083d5fb19c2b0feefe7bd7"},"headline":"Federal Court in California Holds That Subcontractor May Proceed With Claim for Delay Damages, Despite No-Damage-For-Delay Clause, Where Changes to the Work Amount to an Implied Abandonment of the Subcontract","datePublished":"2018-07-18T17:33:02+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/federal-court-california-holds-subcontractor-may-proceed-claim-delay-damages-despite-no-damage-delay-clause-changes-work-amount-implied-abandonment-sub\/"},"wordCount":510,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/#organization"},"keywords":["Advise &amp; Consult","Insurance Claims","No-Damage-for-Delay Provision"],"articleSection":["Construction Contracts"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/federal-court-california-holds-subcontractor-may-proceed-claim-delay-damages-despite-no-damage-delay-clause-changes-work-amount-implied-abandonment-sub\/#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/federal-court-california-holds-subcontractor-may-proceed-claim-delay-damages-despite-no-damage-delay-clause-changes-work-amount-implied-abandonment-sub\/","url":"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/federal-court-california-holds-subcontractor-may-proceed-claim-delay-damages-despite-no-damage-delay-clause-changes-work-amount-implied-abandonment-sub\/","name":"Federal Court in California Holds That Subcontractor May Proceed With Claim for Delay Damages, Despite No-Damage-For-Delay Clause, Where Changes to the Work Amount to an Implied Abandonment of the Subcontract - Advise &amp; Consult, Inc.","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/#website"},"datePublished":"2018-07-18T17:33:02+00:00","description":"Agate\u2019s subcontract with Sauer contained a no-damage-for-delay clause, which generally provided that extensions of time were Agate\u2019s sole remedy for delay","inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/federal-court-california-holds-subcontractor-may-proceed-claim-delay-damages-despite-no-damage-delay-clause-changes-work-amount-implied-abandonment-sub\/"]}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/","name":"Advise &amp; Consult, Inc.","description":"Construction Expert Witnesses","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/#organization"},"potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/#organization","name":"Advise & Consult","url":"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/11\/AC-Red-Logo.png","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/11\/AC-Red-Logo.png","width":162,"height":75,"caption":"Advise & Consult"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/Advise-Consult-Inc-126949043996790\/","https:\/\/x.com\/adviseconsult","https:\/\/www.linkedin.com\/company-beta\/204526\/","https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/user\/MrConstructionExpert"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/0a11abe008083d5fb19c2b0feefe7bd7","name":"admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/b01e71b7acadd7657af782b7ad1a30cc?s=96&d=mm&r=pg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/b01e71b7acadd7657af782b7ad1a30cc?s=96&d=mm&r=pg","caption":"admin"},"sameAs":["http:\/\/www.expertwitnessinconstruction.com"]}]}},"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/p2ztG6-3KIn","jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/894559","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=894559"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/894559\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":894560,"href":"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/894559\/revisions\/894560"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=894559"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=894559"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.myconstructionexpert.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=894559"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}