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 | 5 min read | 04.23.26
CMS Proposes New Payment Policy for IOPOs and HCLs
In keeping with ongoing efforts to intensify regulatory oversight of organ procurement organizations (OPOs) and curtail improper spending within federal health programs, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) recently issued a proposed rule that would, among other adjustments, align Medicare payment policies for non-renal organs to be consistent with those currently applicable to kidneys. If enacted as drafted, this latest rule could have a direct impact on the financial stability of OPOs and histocompatibility laboratories (HCL) at a time when such organizations face increasing pressure to meet CMS’s new outcome measures — or else face non-renewal or decertification later this year.
Client Alert | 2 min read | 04.23.26
Two Lawsuits in One: The Growing Risk of Pairing Biometric Tech With Wage-and-Hour Violations
Client Alert | 3 min read | 04.22.26
Client Alert | 10 min read | 04.22.26
The EU Industrial Accelerator Act Proposal’s Significance for the Automotive Industry
