Ambiguous Instructions Give Disqualified Offeror A Second Chance
Client Alert | less than 1 min read | 06.12.07
The Court of Federal Claims in Heritage of Am., LLC v. U.S. (May 31, 2007) set aside a disqualification of an offeror when the solicitation instructions were unclear about the coverage and labor rates required in the multiple regions solicited, requiring a recompetition with unambiguous instructions. In the prior, related GAO protest, GAO had refused to consider this issue because it was "untimely," but Judge George Miller in this opinion joins the solid majority of the CFC judges holding that GAO timeliness requirements are inapplicable in court protests.
Insights
Client Alert | 8 min read | 06.30.25
AI Companies Prevail in Path-Breaking Decisions on Fair Use
Last week, artificial intelligence companies won two significant copyright infringement lawsuits brought by copyright holders, marking an important milestone in the development of the law around AI. These decisions – Bartz v. Anthropic and Kadrey v. Meta (decided on June 23 and 25, 2025, respectively), along with a February 2025 decision in Thomson Reuters v. ROSS Intelligence – suggest that AI companies have plausible defenses to the intellectual property claims that have dogged them since generative AI technologies became widely available several years ago. Whether AI companies can, in all cases, successfully assert that their use of copyrighted content is “fair” will depend on their circumstances and further development of the law by the courts and Congress.
Client Alert | 3 min read | 06.30.25
Client Alert | 3 min read | 06.26.25
FDA Targets Gene Editing Clinical Trials in China and other “Hostile Countries”
Client Alert | 3 min read | 06.26.25
