Federal Circuit Clarifies Prejudice Review In Bid Protest Cases
Client Alert | less than 1 min read | 04.26.05
Explaining away seemingly contradictory precedent, the Federal Circuit in Bannum, Inc. v. U.S. (Apr. 21, 2005) clarified that, while the merits are reviewed on appeal de novo under the Administrative Procedure Act's "arbitrary and capricious or in violation of law" standard, the determination of whether a violation of law is prejudicial requires fact finding by the Court of Federal Claims and is reviewed for "clear error." Applying the clear error standard to this case, the appellate court found none in the trial court's determination that the violation had not prejudiced the protester.
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
