GAO Introduces New Exception to Timeliness Rules
Client Alert | 1 min read | 02.10.14
In Motorola Solutions, Inc. (Jan. 28, 2014), GAO created an exception to the longstanding rule that information provided to protester's counsel under a protective order creates attributable knowledge to the protester itself, starting the 10-day clock to file a protest. GAO held that, because there was significant evidence that the protester diligently pursued the information during and after the debriefing, protester's lawyers diligently sought release of the non-confidential information from under the protective so they could consult with their client, and these efforts were impeded by unwarranted agency delay, the timeliness of a supplemental protest should be measured from the time of disclosure to the client because GAO will not allow the agency to "unfairly to benefit from its own dilatory behavior" and effectively run out the clock on prospective supplemental protest grounds.
Contacts
Insights
Client Alert | 3 min read | 11.21.25
On November 7, 2025, in Thornton v. National Academy of Sciences, No. 25-cv-2155, 2025 WL 3123732 (D.D.C. Nov. 7, 2025), the District Court for the District of Columbia dismissed a False Claims Act (FCA) retaliation complaint on the basis that the plaintiff’s allegations that he was fired after blowing the whistle on purported illegally discriminatory use of federal funding was not sufficient to support his FCA claim. This case appears to be one of the first filed, and subsequently dismissed, following Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche’s announcement of the creation of the Civil Rights Fraud Initiative on May 19, 2025, which “strongly encourages” private individuals to file lawsuits under the FCA relating to purportedly discriminatory and illegal use of federal funding for diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives in violation of Executive Order 14173, Ending Illegal Discrimination and Restoring Merit-Based Opportunity (Jan. 21, 2025). In this case, the court dismissed the FCA retaliation claim and rejected the argument that an organization could violate the FCA merely by “engaging in discriminatory conduct while conducting a federally funded study.” The analysis in Thornton could be a sign of how forthcoming arguments of retaliation based on reporting allegedly fraudulent DEI activity will be analyzed in the future.
Client Alert | 3 min read | 11.20.25
Client Alert | 3 min read | 11.20.25
Client Alert | 6 min read | 11.19.25
