The Government Contracts Legal Round-Up | Episode 20

In this episode of the Government Contracts Legal Round-Up, Partner David Robbins explains how two recent Court of Federal Claims decisions reaffirm that the court will meaningfully review an agency’s proposed corrective action, underscoring that protest litigation before the court can be very different from protest proceedings before the Government Accountability Office (GAO). He also looks at a recent GAO bid protest that was dismissed as untimely, highlighting that contractors should pay close attention to deadlines to avoid disappointment.

Finally, David discusses the Department of Defense’s final rule amending the Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement pursuant to President Biden’s “Ensuring the Future is Made in America by All of America’s Workers” executive order. He calls out four notable changes to the DFARS that contractors should know about.

In this episode, Partner David Robbins discusses the significant proposed rule issued by the Department of Defense implementing Cybersecurity Maturity Model Certification 2.0.  David also covers suspension/debarment updates and recent bid protest decisions.  

In this episode, Partner David Robbins discusses the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2024. David explains a number of provisions that government contractors and grant recipients should be aware of, including those concerned with foreign purchases, cyber security, and greenhouse gases.

In this episode of the Government Contracts Legal Roundup, David Robbins shares the mic with Jan Larson, a Co-Chair of the firm’s Insurance Recovery and Counseling Practice. Jan explains how her practice dovetails with the needs of government contractors and all policyholders who seek insurance to recover damages. “The key part,” she tells David, “is you’re helping to bring money back in.”

In addition to his interview with Jan, David provides a quick update on a recent DFARS amendment.

Partner David Robbins begins this episode by discussing implications of decisions by the Court of Federal Claims and the GAO. The cases he covers include System Dynamics Int’l, Inc. v. United States; Insight Technology Solutions, LLC; Guidehouse, Inc.; and Zolon PCS II, LLC. He then provides federal grant recipients with takeaways from the OMB’s proposed rewrite of the uniform guidance. He closes by reminding listeners that he will soon publish his Suspension and Debarment By the Numbers analysis for the prior fiscal year.

In this robust episode of the Government Contracts Legal Roundup, David Robbins covers a number of current issues in this episode across the government contracts spectrum of issues, including protests, claims, regulatory and investigations. He closes with a cautionary observation about the Department of Justice’s program to pursue criminal prosecutions for sanctions violations.

In this episode, Partner David Robbins is joined by Nathan Castellano to talk about Nathan’s naming as a co-author of the seminal Formation of Government Contracts treatise and a contributor to The Nash & Cibinic Report.  David then discusses a divergence between COFC and GAO protest practice highlighted by AccelGov, LLC v. United States and also explores two other decisions: KPMG LLP v. United States and B&B Medical Services, Inc.

In this episode, Partner David Robbins discusses important cases and developments facing government contractors and grant recipients. He updates listeners on the Percipient.ai protest, which has sparked significant litigation over the scope of Court of Federal Claims bid protest jurisdiction. He also describes the implications of protest decisions in Leidos Inc.; Booz Allen Hamilton Inc. and BOF GA Lenox Park, LLC. David concludes with an “un-human interest story”: proposed legislation that would force contractors to turn over any “non-earth origin” material that intelligence officials have presumably concealed from Congress. What about protection from alien retribution? That, David notes, is not covered in the bill.

In this episode, Partner David Robbins highlights the Supreme Court’s recent, unanimous opinion in the SuperValue case, which held that the False Claims Act’s scienter element may take into account a defendant’s knowledge and subjective beliefs. David also covers the new FAR rule that prohibits contractors from using TikTok on certain IT products. Last, David discusses the Federal Circuit’s useful reminder of the de novo standard of review that applies to appeals of the Contract Disputes Act.

In this episode, Partner David Robbins highlights the “quiet” end of the contractor COVID-19 vaccine mandate. He also provides take-aways about proposed revisions to cybersecurity standards issued by the National Institute of Standards and Technology and a new voluntary self-identification disability form issued by the Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs. Finally, he reviews a Federal Circuit decision about CDA jurisdiction, a claims case – Mid-Atlantic Constr. & Design Assocs., Inc. v. United States – and two protest cases: Aptim-Amentum Alaska Decommissioning, LLC and TechSynap Corp. v. United States.