Set-aside Determination Must Be Industry-Specific
Client Alert | less than 1 min read | 09.07.12
In DynaLantic Corp. v. U.S. Dep’t of Defense, a small business challenged on constitutional grounds a Navy set-aside for 8(a) small disadvantaged businesses of a simulator buy. The D.C. district court held that there is sufficient evidence of discrimination that limits minority business development for the 8(a) program to withstand a facial challenge, but that, without an agency determination of discrimination in the military simulation and training industry specifically, the Navy was enjoined from using an 8(a) set-aside procurement for the simulator.
Contacts
Insights
Client Alert | 7 min read | 06.24.26
On June 17, 2026, the U.S. Department of Justice’s (DOJ( National Security Division (NSD) announced that it had issued a declination for Robert Bosch GmbH (Bosch) relating to potential violations of the Export Control Reform Act, 50 U.S.C. § 4819 (ECRA). Specifically, the DOJ declined to criminally prosecute Bosch’s violations of the Export Administration Regulations’ (EAR) Foreign Direct Product Rule (FDPR), which apparently resulted from two Bosch subsidiaries’ export of products and software manufactured with equipment that was the direct product of U.S. software or technology to Huawei Technologies Co., Ltd. and its “Entity List” affiliates, including Huawei Tech. Investment Co., Ltd., Hong Kong (collectively, Huawei). The same day, the U.S. Department of Commerce Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS) announced a parallel civil administrative settlement with Bosch.
Client Alert | 3 min read | 06.24.26
Client Alert | 4 min read | 06.23.26
EPA Hands Over AI Data Center Regulation to States and Communities to Develop Best Practices
Client Alert | 3 min read | 06.22.26

