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 | 4 min read | 03.25.26
NAIC Intensifies AI Regulatory Focus: What Health Insurance Payors Need to Know
The National Association of Insurance Commissioners (NAIC) is intensifying its oversight of how insurers use AI — and the pace of regulatory activity shows no signs of slowing. Over the past several months, the NAIC has published a formal Issue Brief staking out its position on federal AI legislation, launched a multistate AI Evaluation Tool pilot aimed at examining insurers’ AI governance programs, and continued to expand adoption of its AI Model Bulletin across state lines. These developments continue a trend towards enhancing regulation; the NAIC adopted AI Principles in 2020 and a Model Bulletin in 2023 clarifying that existing insurance laws apply to AI systems and establishing expectations for governance, documentation, testing, and third-party oversight. That Model Bulletin has now been adopted in approximately 24 states.
Client Alert | 11 min read | 03.25.26
White House National AI Policy Framework Calls for Preempting State Laws, Protecting Children
Client Alert | 3 min read | 03.24.26
California Considering A Massive Expansion of Its Antitrust Laws
Client Alert | 2 min read | 03.23.26
