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 | 1 min read | 08.10.26
In Appeal of Bahadir (a C&M case), the Armed Services Board of Contract Appeals denied the government’s motion to dismiss in its entirety, ruling in favor of the contractor on both key issues raised by the government. The case arises from a contract for construction work at Al Udeid Air Base in Qatar, under which Appellant alleged government-caused delay and filed certified prolongation claims using a “windows analysis” methodology. The government moved to dismiss, arguing that Appellant failed to state a sum certain for each of what the government characterized as 38 distinct claims, and separately that four claims had not been properly presented to the Contracting Officer.
Client Alert | 4 min read | 08.10.26
Client Alert | 4 min read | 08.07.26
Missouri AG Sues Kansas City Over Race- and Sex-Based Contracting Program
Client Alert | 2 min read | 08.06.26
