Ford's Colony
110 Troon
Williamsburg, Virginia 23188-9195

Government Contractor Insights

“Control” Requirements for Service-Disabled Veteran-Owned Small Business Concerns

A procurement preference created by the Veterans Benefit Act of 2003, 15 U.S.C. § 657f, is the preference for small business concerns owned and controlled by service-disabled veterans. This preference is principally ensured by set-asides exclusively for service-disabled veteran-owned small business concerns (known generally as SDVOSBC’s). Eligibility requirements for SDVOSBC’s were established by the Small […]

“Hard Facts” Are Required To Establish a Significant Potential Organizational Conflict of Interest

“Hard Facts” are required to establish a significant potential Organization Conflict of Interest. This means that a fact-specific inquiry must . . . .

Court of Federal Claims Tucker Act Implied-in-Fact Contract Jurisdiction

The Tucker Act, 28 U.S.C. § 1491, creates the Contract jurisdiction of the United States Court of Federal Claims. Included within section (a)(1) of this statute are money-mandating Contracts of the United States, and these money-mandating Contracts may be express or implied-in-fact. This distinction between express and implied-in-fact Contracts recognizes that promises are enforceable whether […]

Kingdomware and the Rule of Two

The U.S. Supreme Court has announced, Kingdomware Technologies, Inc. v. United States, No. 14-916, cert. granted June 22nd, 2015 2015 U.S. LEXIS 4158, that it will this next Term take up Kingdomware Technologies, Inc. v. United States, 754 F.3d 1923 (Fed. Cir. 2014), a Government Contracts case arising from the Federal Circuit. U.S. Supreme Court […]

Limitations Imposed by Administrative Procedure Act Review

Two recent decisions by the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit concern the limited standard of review imposed on Protests, i.e., challenges to Solicitations, else challenges to particular Contracts. The first,

Marijuana, the Mexican Spotted Owl, and Jury Verdicts

These seemingly unrelated subjects are involved in two rulings by the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit which together provide important limitations on the implied-in-fact duty not to hinder and to cooperate. The cases are Agredano v. United States, Fed. Cir. No. 2008-5114, February 17, 2010 and Precision Pine and Timber, Inc. […]

Price Reasonableness, Price Realism, and Protest Review

The U.S. Court of Federal Claims provides a clear exposition of the differences between Price Reasonableness and Price Realism and a few lessons about the scope of Protest review in DMS All-Star Joint Venture v. United States, Fed. Cl. No. 09-737C, January 26, 2010. At issue in DMS All-Star was a proposed indefinite delivery, indefinite […]

Protest or Contract Disputes Act Claim?

The Federal Circuit’s decision in Distributed Solutions, Inc. v. United States, Fed. Cir. No. 2007-5145, August 28, 2008, has created a problem for Cases involving elements both of a Protest and of a Contract Disputes Act Claim arising under the Contract Disputes Act, 41 U.S.C. §§ 7101-7109. This problem has most recently manifested itself in […]

The Contract Disputes Act, Compulsory Counterclaims, and Contracting Officer Final Decisions

Federal Contractors who elect to take their Contract Disputes Act Claims, 41 U.S.C. § 7103(a)(1), to the United States Court of Federal Claims, 41 U.S.C. § 7104(b)(1), rather than to an Agency Board of Contract Appeals, 41 U.S.C. § 7104(a), enjoy an advantage, the Court’s Compulsory Counterclaim Rule. Under this Rule (which is set out […]

The Federal Circuit Validates the Implied-in-Fact Contract Theory of Protest Jurisdiction

The Federal Circuit has resolved a quandary about the implied-in-fact contract theory of protest jurisdiction, this in Resource Conservation Group, LLC v. United States, Fed. Cir. No. 2009-5091, March 1, 2010. Resource Conservation Group arises out of a Claim for bid preparation costs and fees filed after the Navy rejected an Offer to lease the […]