1. Home
  2. |Insights
  3. |Diving into the State Actions Targeting Russia that May Impact State Government Contractors

Diving into the State Actions Targeting Russia that May Impact State Government Contractors

Client Alert | 2 min read | 04.01.22

As discussed in our previous alert on the Federal Contracting for Peace and Security Act, many state governors and legislatures have issued or are contemplating actions to limit state contracts with companies doing business in Russia.  A growing number of states have already passed legislation that codifies Russia-related prohibitions.  These fast-moving developments could significantly impact government contractors’ operations.   

First, over 20 states—including AL, AR, CA, CO, GA, IL, IN, MA, MD, MN, MO, MS, MT, NC, NE, NJ, NY, OH, TX, VA, VT, and WA—have implemented or proposed actions to review or terminate existing state contracts and procurements with Russian entities and/or to prohibit state agencies from entering into new contracts with Russian entities.  For example, the Texas Comptroller is reviewing every state contract and procurement in Texas’s Statewide Procurement Division and every payment made through the Texas Treasury for ties to Russian-owned businesses.  Similarly, Virginia and Indiana ordered immediate reviews of tax dollars spent on goods and services from Russian-owned or -affiliated companies.

Second, several states are considering or have already enacted certification and disclosure requirements for state contractors related to Russia and Belarus.  For example, California requires all grantees, and contractors with agreements valued at $5 million or more, “to report on steps they have taken in response to Russia’s actions in Ukraine, including, but not limited to, desisting from making new investments in, or engaging in financial transactions with, Russian entities, not transferring technology to Russia or Russian entities, and directly providing support to the government and people of Ukraine.”  Similarly, Georgia requires contractors to certify upon submitting a bid or proposal that they are not a company owned or operated by the governments of Russia or Belarus.

Crowell & Moring is continuing to track these fast-moving developments across all 50 states.  Our team is available to help companies navigate the many complex issues at both the federal and state levels.

Contacts

Insights

Client Alert | 5 min read | 09.03.25

If You’re Not First, You’re Last: Federal Circuit’s First Review of an AIA Derivation Proceeding

Nearly a decade and a half after the passage of the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act (“AIA”), the Federal Circuit finally had its first occasion to review an appeal of a derivation proceeding that was litigated before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“Board”) in Global Health Solutions LLC v. Selner. This case provides helpful guidance for patent litigators regarding the proper legal framework in a derivation proceeding and serves as a reminder that patent applications should be filed as soon as possible. As the facts of this case show, it is important that inventors retain documents and other evidence of the conception of their invention, as well as its communication to others, should there be any challenge to their invention....

View All Insights