R-E-V-I-E-W Does Not Spell R-E-L-I-E-F
Client Alert | less than 1 min read | 12.06.04
Rejecting the contention that, after finding arbitrary and capricious conduct by procurement officials, the award must be declared invalid and set aside, the Federal Circuit in PGBA v. U.S. (Nov. 22, 2004) says that a court is to apply the normal balancing of the equities, including the public interest, when deciding whether to grant an injunction after finding for a protester on the merits. Congress only adopted the review provisions of section 706 of the Administrative Procedure Act, the court explained, not its seemingly mandatory relief provisions.
Insights
Client Alert | 3 min read | 07.23.26
It is well established that “[c]ompetitive prejudice is an essential element of every viable protest.” Yet, for decades, the U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) has tempered this requirement with two critical corollaries: protesters need only demonstrate a “reasonable possibility” that they were prejudiced by an agency’s actions, and GAO “will resolve doubts regarding prejudice in favor of the protester.” These principles have been consistent features of GAO’s bid protest jurisprudence for more than 30 years. See, e.g., United Int’l Eng'g, Inc., B-245448, Jan. 29, 1992, 71 CPD ¶ 177.
Client Alert | 3 min read | 07.23.26
Second Circuit Affirms Preliminary Injunction Against Nielsen in Constructive Tying Case
Client Alert | 4 min read | 07.22.26
Client Alert | 4 min read | 07.22.26
Ghost Advertising: Compliance Takeaways From the Gymshark Influencer Class Action
