DoD Issues Class Deviation For Small Business Joint Venture Offerors Until SAM Is Updated to Account for Recent FAR Revisions
Client Alert | 1 min read | 10.27.22
On October 26, 2022, the Department of Defense published a class deviation establishing alternative procedures for verifying the small business size and status of joint venture offerors. This class deviation is necessary because, effective October 28, 2022, the Federal Acquisition Regulation has been updated to include new certifications for use by joint venture offerors in FAR solicitation provisions 52.212-3 and 52.219-1—via a FAR update on which Crowell previously reported. Due to a lag in system implementation in the System for Award Management (SAM) and in the interface between SAM and the Small Business Administration, SAM will not reflect the new representations immediately. As such, DoD’s class deviation provides language for contracting officers to use in solicitations in lieu of relying on SAM for size and status certifications of joint venture offerors.
Contacts
Insights
Client Alert | 5 min read | 12.12.25
Eleventh Circuit Hears Argument on False Claims Act Qui Tam Constitutionality
On the morning of December 12, 2025, the Eleventh Circuit heard argument in United States ex rel. Zafirov v. Florida Medical Associates, LLC, et al., No. 24-13581 (11th Cir. 2025). This case concerns the constitutionality of the False Claims Act (FCA) qui tam provisions and a groundbreaking September 2024 opinion in which the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida held that the FCA’s qui tam provisions were unconstitutional under Article II. See United States ex rel. Zafirov v. Fla. Med. Assocs., LLC, 751 F. Supp. 3d 1293 (M.D. Fla. 2024). That decision, penned by District Judge Kathryn Kimball Mizelle, was the first success story for a legal theory that has been gaining steam ever since Justices Thomas, Barrett, and Kavanaugh indicated they would be willing to consider arguments about the constitutionality of the qui tam provisions in U.S. ex rel. Polansky v. Exec. Health Res., 599 U.S. 419 (2023). In her opinion, Judge Mizelle held (1) qui tam relators are officers of the U.S. who must be appointed under the Appointments Clause; and (2) historical practice treating qui tam and similar relators as less than “officers” for constitutional purposes was not enough to save the qui tam provisions from the fundamental Article II infirmity the court identified. That ruling was appealed and, after full briefing, including by the government and a bevy of amici, the litigants stepped up to the plate this morning for oral argument.
Client Alert | 8 min read | 12.11.25
Director Squires Revamps the Workings of the U.S. Patent Office
Client Alert | 8 min read | 12.10.25
Creativity You Can Use: CJEU Clarifies Copyright for Applied Art
Client Alert | 4 min read | 12.10.25
Federal Court Strikes Down Interior Order Suspending Wind Energy Development
