Accurate Historical Data Yields Negligent Estimate
Client Alert | 1 min read | 02.28.17
In Agility Def. & Gov’t Servs., Inc. v. United States (Feb. 6, 2017), the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit held that the government’s volume estimate in a requirements-contract solicitation cannot rely solely on historical workloads when the government expects conditions to change going forward. FAR 16.503 requires solicitations for requirements contracts to include a “realistic estimate of total quantity” based on “the most current information available.” Reversing a decision from the Court of Federal Claims, the CAFC revived the contractor’s negligent-estimate claim, holding that the government failed to comply with FAR 16.503 when its estimate relied on historical data rather than the agency’s actual expectation that changing conditions would create a surge in requirements above and beyond the historical workloads.
Contacts
Insights
Client Alert | 10 min read | 03.19.26
[1] In a recent development, the UK Supreme Court ruled that Artificial Neural Networks (ANNs) are not excluded from patentability due to being a computer program “as such.” In doing so, the Court set out the framework of a new test for the UK Intellectual Property Office (IPO) to use when evaluating the patentability of computer. The ruling breaks down barriers to the patenting of AI algorithms in the UK and paves the way for a wider change in the UK IPO’s approach to assessing excluded subject matter.
Client Alert | 7 min read | 03.19.26
Client Alert | 6 min read | 03.18.26
CFTC Takes Additional Steps Toward Prediction Market Regulation: What You Need to Know
Client Alert | 4 min read | 03.18.26
