1. Home
  2. |Insights
  3. |Intentional Low Bid Is Not A False Claim

Intentional Low Bid Is Not A False Claim

Client Alert | 1 min read | 02.26.04

In U.S. ex rel. Bettis v. Odebrecht Contractors of Cal. (Jan. 28, 2004), the D.C. federal district court granted summary judgment in the contractor's favor, rejecting numerous False Claims Act allegations, including, most notably, the relator’s theory that the contractor had fraudulently induced the government to enter into a construction contract by intentionally underbidding for the project, while allegedly planning to submit false changes claims during performance. While expressly recognizing that false estimates could be the basis of an actionable false claim, the court ruled that the mere knowing submission of an unreasonably low bid (at least in the absence of any subsequent illegitimate request for adjustment) did not, by itself, cause the government to pay out funds to which the contractor was not entitled.

Insights

Client Alert | 2 min read | 07.15.26

CMMC Phase II Suspension Requires Reconsideration of Such Requirements in Solicitations

As discussed in more detail here, the U.S. Department of War (DoW) recently issued a memorandum (Memo 26-P-1023, dated July 13, 2026) directing the immediate suspension of Cybersecurity Maturity Model Certification (CMMC) Phase II requirements (Level I and II self assessments are still permitted). Significantly, the memo directs that “all pending and future CMMC implementation milestones across DoW solicitations and contracts are held in abeyance until further notice.” Moreover, the DoW issued a memorandum on implementing these requirements (available here), directing agencies to issue amendments removing CMMC Level 2 and 3 requirements from active solicitations “as soon as practicable.” Contractors should monitor the government’s compliance with this requirement and should be prepared, if needed, to file a bid protest to protect their rights....

View All Insights