CFC Finds Unreasonable Deviation from Customary Commercial Practices
Client Alert | less than 1 min read | 10.26.11
In U.S. Foodservice, Inc. v. U.S., the Court of Federal Claims, while finding that the Army DLA Troop Support had demonstrated a rational basis for a number of provisions that deviated from standard commercial terms and conditions in the food service industry, nonetheless enjoined the procurement because the solicitation's Most Favored Customer clause, itself a deviation from customary commercial practices, was an "irrational and unreasonable attempt towards pursuing [DLA's] overall goals of increasing transparency and reducing fraud." The court explained that the MFC provision was overbroad and would force offerors to submit and certify a price that would include elements that are "completely untethered from ascertainable or predictable knowledge."
Contacts
Insights
Client Alert | 2 min read | 12.19.25
GAO Cautions Agencies—Over-Redact at Your Own Peril
Bid protest practitioners in recent years have witnessed agencies’ increasing efforts to limit the production of documents and information in response to Government Accountability Office (GAO) bid protests—often will little pushback from GAO. This practice has underscored the notable difference in the scope of bid protest records before GAO versus the Court of Federal Claims. However, in Tiger Natural Gas, Inc., B-423744, Dec. 10, 2025, 2025 CPD ¶ __, GAO made clear that there are limits to the scope of redactions, and GAO will sustain a protest where there is insufficient evidence that the agency’s actions were reasonable.
Client Alert | 7 min read | 12.19.25
In Bid to Ban “Woke AI,” White House Imposes Transparency Requirements on Contractors
Client Alert | 5 min read | 12.19.25
Navigating California’s Evolving Microplastics Landscape in 2026
Client Alert | 19 min read | 12.18.25
2025 GAO Bid Protest Annual Report: Where Have All the Protests Gone?

