Take Care to Preserve Ordering and Option Rights
Client Alert | less than 1 min read | 02.23.11
In a 2-1 decision in Mabus v. Gen. Dynamics C4 Sys., Inc. (Feb. 4, 2011), the Federal Circuit held that GD was equitably estopped to void an order exercise by the government due to the wrong transmission method because it had repeatedly accepted that method during prior performance. The lesson for contractors is to scrutinize each order and option exercise and, if it is deficient in any way but is still desirable, to put the government on notice that it is being accepted despite the noted deficiency and without prejudice with regard to future exercises.
Contacts
Insights
Client Alert | 4 min read | 09.15.26
GAO Indicates Reasonable Conflict of Interest Investigation Must Include Inquiry of Involved Firm
The U.S. Government Accountability Office’s (GAO) recent decision in Viderity Inc.—Costs, B-424422.5, Sept. 1, 2026, offers useful insight into what constitutes a legally sufficient conflict of interest investigation. The decision arose in an unusual procedural posture: Viderity initially protested, alleging that an agency evaluator had a personal conflict of interest. After the agency took corrective action, Viderity filed a cost entitlement claim requesting that GAO direct the agency to reimburse Viderity’s protest costs. In evaluating that claim, GAO assessed whether Viderity’s underlying protest ground was “clearly meritorious.”
Client Alert | 3 min read | 09.15.26
Client Alert | 7 min read | 09.14.26
AI in Life Sciences: Ten Legal Considerations and Risks of AI Use in Drug Discovery and Development
Client Alert | 6 min read | 09.14.26
Mental Health Parity Bulletin Restates Best Practices for Evaluating Compliance
