The DoD Issues Memo Regarding Section 3610 of the CARES Act; Implementing Guidance to Follow
Client Alert | 1 min read | 03.31.20
On March 30, 2020, the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense, Acting Principal Director, Defense Pricing and Contracting (DPC) issued the Managing Defense Contracts Impacts of the Novel Coronavirus Memorandum. The Memorandum recognizes the challenges the Department of Defense faces in response to COVID-19, and reiterates the importance of ensuring the health and vitality of the defense industrial base (DIB) during this national emergency. The Memorandum notes the regulatory tools already in place to address COVID-19 impacts—e.g., FAR 52.249-14, Excusable Delays, various termination clauses, various changes clauses, and FAR 52.212-4 for commercial contracts—and highlights the protection of health and safety of contract employees as an important consideration when assessing requests for equitable adjustment. In addition to pointing to these traditional clauses, the Memorandum recognizes Section 3610 of the CARES Act as a mechanism to allow recovery for COVID-19 impacts and states that DPC will provide implementing guidance for such recovery. The Memorandum concludes by noting that contracting officers “are trusted and empowered to make the difficult decisions on appropriate adjustment to each contract” and that they “must work closely with our industry partners to ensure continuity of operations and mission effectiveness, while protecting the continuing vitality of the DIB that is so critical to our national security.”
Contacts
Insights
Client Alert | 5 min read | 12.12.25
Eleventh Circuit Hears Argument on False Claims Act Qui Tam Constitutionality
On the morning of December 12, 2025, the Eleventh Circuit heard argument in United States ex rel. Zafirov v. Florida Medical Associates, LLC, et al., No. 24-13581 (11th Cir. 2025). This case concerns the constitutionality of the False Claims Act (FCA) qui tam provisions and a groundbreaking September 2024 opinion in which the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida held that the FCA’s qui tam provisions were unconstitutional under Article II. See United States ex rel. Zafirov v. Fla. Med. Assocs., LLC, 751 F. Supp. 3d 1293 (M.D. Fla. 2024). That decision, penned by District Judge Kathryn Kimball Mizelle, was the first success story for a legal theory that has been gaining steam ever since Justices Thomas, Barrett, and Kavanaugh indicated they would be willing to consider arguments about the constitutionality of the qui tam provisions in U.S. ex rel. Polansky v. Exec. Health Res., 599 U.S. 419 (2023). In her opinion, Judge Mizelle held (1) qui tam relators are officers of the U.S. who must be appointed under the Appointments Clause; and (2) historical practice treating qui tam and similar relators as less than “officers” for constitutional purposes was not enough to save the qui tam provisions from the fundamental Article II infirmity the court identified. That ruling was appealed and, after full briefing, including by the government and a bevy of amici, the litigants stepped up to the plate this morning for oral argument.
Client Alert | 8 min read | 12.11.25
Director Squires Revamps the Workings of the U.S. Patent Office
Client Alert | 8 min read | 12.10.25
Creativity You Can Use: CJEU Clarifies Copyright for Applied Art
Client Alert | 4 min read | 12.10.25
Federal Court Strikes Down Interior Order Suspending Wind Energy Development
