NRO Prohibits Exclusive Teaming Agreements
Client Alert | less than 1 min read | 06.09.04
The National Reconaissance Office has adopted a clause prohibiting offerors on NRO procurements from entering into exclusive teaming agreements, based upon a determination that "such arrangements unduly limit competition." N15.209-70(i), prescribing N52.215-020, "Exclusive Teaming Prohibition (May 2004)." By contrast, having received comments that it could have the effect of impairing legitimate, pro-competitive teaming arrangements, DOD in April 2002 withdrew a proposed DFAR that would have required contracting personnel to refer to the Justice Department exclusive teaming agreements that they considered to be "anti-competitive," finding that there was no demonstrated need for such a regulation.
Contacts
Insights
Client Alert | 5 min read | 06.01.26
California Court Upholds Insurer’s Duty to Defend After Covered Claim Is Dismissed
On April 30, 2026, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California issued a significant ruling in an insurance coverage dispute between a commercial general liability insurer and its policyholder. The decision addresses several critical issues in insurance law, including the scope and continuity of the duty to defend and the standard for insurer reimbursement of defense costs in mixed-claim actions. The court ruled largely in favor of the insured, SVO Building One, LLC ("SVO"), and the matter now heads toward settlement or trial on SVO's remaining counterclaims.
Client Alert | 2 min read | 05.29.26
California Assembly Passes AB 1776, Sending Major Antitrust Bill to the Senate
Client Alert | 5 min read | 05.29.26
Clover Insurance v. HHS: S.D. of Georgia Holds 20 Star Ratings Measures Unlawful
Client Alert | 3 min read | 05.29.26
