Court Tackles Hubzone Issues In Two Cases
Client Alert | less than 1 min read | 04.12.05
In Mark Dunning Industries, Inc. v. U.S. (Mar. 4, 2005), the Court of Federal Claims, after finding it has jurisdiction to review a SBA protest decision of a bidder's HUBZone qualification, decided that the SBA had appropriately found the bidder qualified because its "principal office" (which was in a HUBZone) was different from its headquarters (which was not). In Manson Construction Co. v. U.S. (Mar. 14, 2005), the court validated award to the second-low bidder which won because of application of the HUBZone preference, while also upholding the agency's revision of its internal estimate that brought the contractor within the "zone" of permissible cost.
Insights
Client Alert | 3 min read | 03.24.26
California Considering A Massive Expansion of Its Antitrust Laws
Legislative efforts to significantly expand California’s antitrust laws are working their way through the state legislature. The most comprehensive overhaul is Assembly Bill 1776 — the Competition and Opportunity in Markets for a Prosperous, Equitable and Transparent Economy (COMPETE) Act, introduced by Assembly Majority Leader Cecilia Aguiar-Curry, on March 23, 2026. AB 1776 is modeled closely after draft legislation recommended by the California Law Revision Commission (CLRC) in December. AB 1776 would not only significantly expand potential liability for single-firm conduct and monopolization but would also explicitly decouple California antitrust analysis from certain federal standards. Companies doing business in California should pay close attention to AB 1776 because of its potentially dramatic impact, including increased exposure to antitrust litigation and increased compliance costs.
Client Alert | 2 min read | 03.23.26
Client Alert | 1 min read | 03.23.26
Client Alert | 7 min read | 03.23.26
