Only Significant OCIs Require Mitigation
Client Alert | less than 1 min read | 08.18.10
On August 5, 2010, the Federal Circuit in PAI Corp. v. U.S. affirmed the lower court's determination that contracting officers have an obligation to mitigate "significant" OCIs, but that the FAR does not require "mitigation of other types of conflicts, such as apparent or potential non-significant conflicts." The Federal Circuit also held that contracting officers have broad discretion to determine whether an OCI is "significant" and that FAR 9.504(a) does not require that contracting officers document their initial identification and evaluation of potential conflicts.
Contacts
Insights
Client Alert | 5 min read | 12.23.25
An ITAR-ly Critical Reminder of Cybersecurity Requirements: DOJ Settles with Swiss Automation, Inc.
Earlier this month, the Department of Justice (DOJ) announced that Swiss Automation Inc., an Illinois-based precision machining company, agreed to pay $421,234 to resolve allegations that it violated the False Claims Act (FCA) by inadequately protecting technical drawings for parts delivered to Department of Defense (DoD) prime contractors. This settlement reflects DOJ's persistent emphasis on cybersecurity compliance across all levels of the defense industrial base, reaching beyond prime contractors to encompass subcontractors and smaller suppliers. The settlement is also a reminder to all contractors not to overlook the often confusing relationship between Controlled Unclassified Information (CUI) and export-controlled information.
Client Alert | 2 min read | 12.23.25
Record-Setting False Claims Act Settlement Highlights DOJ Commitment to Customs Enforcement
Client Alert | 22 min read | 12.23.25
Client Alert | 6 min read | 12.22.25
Emerging Legal Issues for Skilled Nursing Facilities in New York: A Year in Review
