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 | 5 min read | 06.01.26
California Court Upholds Insurer’s Duty to Defend After Covered Claim Is Dismissed
On April 30, 2026, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California issued a significant ruling in an insurance coverage dispute between a commercial general liability insurer and its policyholder. The decision addresses several critical issues in insurance law, including the scope and continuity of the duty to defend and the standard for insurer reimbursement of defense costs in mixed-claim actions. The court ruled largely in favor of the insured, SVO Building One, LLC ("SVO"), and the matter now heads toward settlement or trial on SVO's remaining counterclaims.
Client Alert | 2 min read | 05.29.26
California Assembly Passes AB 1776, Sending Major Antitrust Bill to the Senate
Client Alert | 5 min read | 05.29.26
Clover Insurance v. HHS: S.D. of Georgia Holds 20 Star Ratings Measures Unlawful
Client Alert | 3 min read | 05.29.26
