SBA Cannot Replace Agency Responsibility Findings with Its Own
Client Alert | less than 1 min read | 09.30.11
In Spiral Solutions & Techs., Inc., the Small Business Administration’s Office of Hearings and Appeals (“OHA”) reversed a size decision finding a violation of the ostensible subcontractor rule because the SBA Area Office improperly made findings on matters of responsibility--matters reserved for the contracting officer. Additionally, OHA explained that Spiral’s hiring of its subcontractor’s incumbent, non-management personnel is no longer indicative of “undue reliance” in light of Executive Order 13,495, which encourages companies to offer a right of first refusal of employment to qualified employees performing under a predecessor contract for similar services at a particular location.
Contacts
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
