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 | 3 min read | 11.12.25
EPA Proposes Important Revisions to its PFAS Reporting Regulations
On November 10, 2025, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) released proposed regulations that, if adopted, would substantially alter the reporting obligations of companies that manufacture or import products containing per- or polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS). The proposed regulations would significantly reduce reporting burdens by exempting numerous products that currently trigger reporting requirements under EPA’s PFAS reporting regulations. The proposed regulations would also delay the current deadline for reporting.
Client Alert | 3 min read | 11.06.25
Client Alert | 2 min read | 11.06.25
Key Takeaways to the State Attorneys General - Election Day 2025
Client Alert | 3 min read | 11.06.25
Supreme Court Oral Argument on Presidential Tariff Authority
