Topic Archives: Protests & Litigation

Try, Try Again

A recent defective pricing case, Alloy Surfaces Co., ASBCA No. 59625, 2020 WL 1896784, April 9, 2020, charmingly illustrates the Government’s doggedness in trying to reprice a contract using the Truth in Negotiations Act (TINA).  The Armed Services Board of Contracting Appeals did not buy into any of the Government’s arguments, finding that an undisclosed ...›

May 6, 2020Protests & Litigation

April Bid Protest Roundup (Law360 Spotlight)

This installment of our monthly Law360 bid protest spotlight features a number of noteworthy decisions from the U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO), Court of Federal Claims (COFC) and Federal Circuit.  Eskridge & Associates addresses the hurdles associated with establishing prejudice.  Abacus Technology Corporation discusses an agency’s requirement (or lack thereof) to conduct a price realism ...›

April 6, 2020Protests & Litigation

March Bid Protest Roundup (Law360 Spotlight)

Neither rain nor sleet nor quarantine restrictions stop bid protests or our monthly roundup.  Thus far the virus has not resulted in dramatic changes to GAO processes, as they have been almost completely electronic from the start.  It is possible, though, that contractors may see more written debriefings, debriefings conducted by phone, or delayed debriefings, ...›

Unprecedented Discovery Orders Vacated: Fourth Circuit Confirms Government Contractors Do Not Waive Privilege by Disclosing Facts Uncovered during an Internal Investigation under the FAR’s Mandatory Disclosure Rule

Lawyers often view a writ of mandamus to a Court of Appeals as a last-gasp—indeed, almost hopeless—stratagem.  But sometimes they are granted, particularly when the district court order they challenge is even more extraordinary.  That is what just happened in In re Fluor Intercontinental, Inc., No. 20-1241 (4th Cir. March 25, 2020).  In this case, ...›

March 6, 2020Protests & Litigation

February 2020 Bid Protest Roundup (Law360 Spotlight)

This installment of our monthly Law360 bid protest spotlight features three noteworthy decisions from the Government Accountability Office (“GAO”) concerning reprocurement contracts, timeliness rules, and discussions.  Steel Point Solutions, LLC addresses the proper scope of reprocurement contracts.  Vizocom provides a cautionary tale for contractors regarding late proposal submissions.  Finally, Education Development Center, Inc. addresses the ...›

February 10, 2020Protests & Litigation

January 2020 Bid Protest Roundup

This installment of our monthly Law360 bid protest bid protest spotlight examines three protest decisions addressing challenges to contractor performance assessment reports (“CPARs”), procurements through the General Services Administration’s (“GSA”) Federal Supply Schedules (“FSS”), and standing to protest. In Colonna’s Shipyard, Inc., the Court of Federal Claims opened its door to a bid protest ostensibly ...›

Court of Federal Claims Marks Its Territory, Confirms CDA Jurisdiction Over Proprietary Legends

The Court of Federal Claims recently affirmed its jurisdiction to settle disputes over protective markings in Raytheon Co. v. United States.[i]  In that case, Raytheon asked the Court to review a contracting officer’s demand that Raytheon replace its common proprietary, not-subject-to-release-under-FOIA[ii] marking with the “Government Purpose Rights” legend prescribed by the DFARS. [iii] Among other ...›

Protests and Litigation
January 21, 2020Protests & Litigation

2019 Protest Roundup

This installment of our Law360 bid protest spotlight examines two protest decisions released in December, provides a year-end review of key bid protest decisions from 2019, and discusses a few takeaways from the U.S. Government Accountability Office‘s fiscal year 2019 report on its bid protest decisions. December Cases T3I Solutions, LLC, B-418034, B-418034.2, Dec. 13, ...›

January 15, 2020Compliance, Protests & Litigation

Defective Certifications: Where to Draw the Line?

Somewhat surprisingly, the end of 2019 provided two decisions regarding defective certifications, including one from the Federal Circuit. The first case, Kirlin Builders, LLC, ASBCA No. 61901, reminds readers that a defective certification, as opposed to no certification at all, is a correctable error so long as it is made before the issuance of a ...›