GAO Bites Agency On Corrective Action Discussions
Client Alert | 1 min read | 06.02.09
In American K-9 Detection Services, Inc. (May 5, 2009), GAO held that, in implementing corrective action in response to a protest, the agency improperly limited discussions primarily to allowing the awardee to fix its otherwise unacceptable proposal and that the limitation resulted in "unequal, not meaningful, discussions" because the agency failed to provide the protester with the opportunity to become more competitive by allowing it to address its own significant weaknesses or deficiencies through meaningful discussions. GAO also distinguished its untimeliness holding in Domain Name Alliance Registry, 2008 CPD ¶ 168, finding that there the agency informed offerors that the corrective action would not include discussions, while here "the agency did not clearly announce the ground rules of the corrective action."
Contacts
Insights
Client Alert | 8 min read | 06.30.25
AI Companies Prevail in Path-Breaking Decisions on Fair Use
Last week, artificial intelligence companies won two significant copyright infringement lawsuits brought by copyright holders, marking an important milestone in the development of the law around AI. These decisions – Bartz v. Anthropic and Kadrey v. Meta (decided on June 23 and 25, 2025, respectively), along with a February 2025 decision in Thomson Reuters v. ROSS Intelligence – suggest that AI companies have plausible defenses to the intellectual property claims that have dogged them since generative AI technologies became widely available several years ago. Whether AI companies can, in all cases, successfully assert that their use of copyrighted content is “fair” will depend on their circumstances and further development of the law by the courts and Congress.
Client Alert | 3 min read | 06.30.25
Client Alert | 3 min read | 06.26.25
FDA Targets Gene Editing Clinical Trials in China and other “Hostile Countries”
Client Alert | 3 min read | 06.26.25
