Separate CAS Noncompliances May Get Separate SOL
Client Alert | 1 min read | 01.22.14
In Appeal of Fluor Corp., the ASBCA held that the government's claim relating to an alleged CAS 403 noncompliance "was a continuing claim inherently susceptible to being broken down into a series of independent distinct events," namely, each payment by the government for a CAS-non-compliant billing. Thus, the board held that, under the CDA's statute of limitations, the government "knew or should have known" that it had a claim against the contractor as of the date the compliance audit was completed (for amounts paid before that date), but that claims for the same alleged CAS noncompliance in subsequent years would not accrue until the amounts at issue for those years had been billed and paid, a result that may save some government claims from the CDA's 6-year SOL (previously discussed here, here, here, here, and here).
Insights
Client Alert | 8 min read | 06.30.25
AI Companies Prevail in Path-Breaking Decisions on Fair Use
Last week, artificial intelligence companies won two significant copyright infringement lawsuits brought by copyright holders, marking an important milestone in the development of the law around AI. These decisions – Bartz v. Anthropic and Kadrey v. Meta (decided on June 23 and 25, 2025, respectively), along with a February 2025 decision in Thomson Reuters v. ROSS Intelligence – suggest that AI companies have plausible defenses to the intellectual property claims that have dogged them since generative AI technologies became widely available several years ago. Whether AI companies can, in all cases, successfully assert that their use of copyrighted content is “fair” will depend on their circumstances and further development of the law by the courts and Congress.
Client Alert | 3 min read | 06.30.25
Client Alert | 3 min read | 06.26.25
FDA Targets Gene Editing Clinical Trials in China and other “Hostile Countries”
Client Alert | 3 min read | 06.26.25
