DAM Contractor's Underbidding Insufficient For FCA Liability
Client Alert | 1 min read | 01.21.05
Affirming summary judgment, the D.C. Circuit in U.S. ex rel. Bettis v. Oderbrecht Contractors (Jan. 11, 2005) held that evidence that a dam contractor (1) underbid, (2) reaffirmed its underbid, and (3) claimed that it would use cost-saving measures it never employed did not permit the conclusion that the contractor fraudulently induced the Army Corps of Engineers to award it the contract. The Court acknowledged that claims submitted for payment under a contract that was fraudulently induced can give rise to civil False Claims Act liability, but found in this case that the contractor's underbid was not a promise that its estimated costs were accurate, only that it would perform the dam work at the unit prices it bid, such that submission of claims for payment under the contract, including claims for equitable adjustments above the contract price, were not false claims.
Insights
Client Alert | 14 min read | 03.13.26
AI for Government: 7 Days for Contractor Comments on GSA Proposed Contract Clause for AI Systems
On March 6, 2026, the General Services Administration (GSA) issued a significant proposed contract clause, GSAR 552.239-7001, Basic Safeguarding of Artificial Intelligence Systems (“Clause”), for inclusion in GSA Schedule solicitations and contracts for AI capabilities. The proposed clause would impose substantial new requirements related to AI sources, intellectual property rights, data use, change management, and performance standards. The Clause would also take precedence over any other contract terms (including commercial licensing terms) related to AI, including a Seller’s terms of sale and service to which the Government had previously agreed. GSA requests comments by March 20, 2026.
Client Alert | 3 min read | 03.12.26
DOJ Releases First-Ever Department-Wide Corporate Enforcement and Voluntary Self-Disclosure Policy
Client Alert | 3 min read | 03.12.26
