1. Home
  2. |Insights
  3. |GAO Finds Eight Days Insufficient for FPR Response

GAO Finds Eight Days Insufficient for FPR Response

Client Alert | 1 min read | 12.03.19

In a recently published decision, MCR Federal, LLC, GAO sustained a protest challenging the required response date for final proposal revisions in a task order procurement. Specifically, as part of its voluntary corrective action in response to an earlier post award protest by MCR, the agency issued MCR two “interchange notices” stating concerns related to experience levels and the contingent-hire nature of the majority of MCR’s proposed staffing, and permitting MCR two days to “either revise or confirm” its proposal. MCR again protested that the allotted two days were insufficient. In response, the agency extended the deadline to a total of eight days and then moved to dismiss. GAO declined to dismiss. Instead, it sustained MCR’s protest, finding eight days insufficient to provide MCR a fair opportunity to improve its proposal. Subsequently, GAO dismissed the agency’s reconsideration request and declined to recommend a specific time period for final proposal revisions. 


Insights

Client Alert | 4 min read | 08.28.25

9th Circuit Marches Forward to the Future Finding Digital Assets Are Protected Under Trademark Law

The Ninth Circuit ruled that NFTs are not just digital collectibles but legally recognized goods under the Lanham Act. Yuga Labs, Inc. v. Ryder Ripps and Jeremy Cahen, Case No. 24-879 (9th Cir. July 23, 2025). NFTs are intangible, fully virtual, authenticating software code that is associated with separate digital or physical content. Although the Ninth Circuit found that there were genuine issues of material fact that precluded summary judgment on the issue of likelihood of confusion, the court recognized that NFTs are commercial products with tangible value subject to trademark protection. This means that NFT creators and projects can now claim trademark rights in their collections’ names, logos, and associated marks....