1. Home
  2. |Professionals
  3. |Zachary Schroeder

Zachary Schroeder

Counsel

Overview

Zachary Schroeder is a counsel in Crowell & Moring’s Washington, D.C. office, where he practices in the Government Contracts Group.

Zach represents contractors in both litigation and counseling matters. His practice focuses on representing contractors in bid protests before the Government Accountability Office (GAO), the U.S. Court of Federal Claims, and the Federal Aviation Administration’s Office of Dispute Resolution for Acquisition. His practice also includes federal regulatory and ethics compliance, as well as various aspects of state and local procurement law, including representing contractors in size protests and affiliation matters. In the transactional context, Zach has performed government contracts diligence for government contractors in a range of industries.

While in law school, Zach served as a judicial intern for Judge Mary Ellen Coster Williams at the U.S. Court of Federal Claims. He also served as the chair of the 2017 Government Contracts Moot Court Competition and as an editorial staff member of the American Intellectual Property Law Association (AIPLA) Quarterly Journal.

Career & Education

|
    • U.S. Court of Federal Claims
      Judicial Intern to the Hon. Judge Mary Ellen Coster Williams, 2017
    • U.S. Court of Federal Claims
      Judicial Intern to the Hon. Judge Mary Ellen Coster Williams, 2017
    • University of Delaware, B.A., 2014
    • The George Washington University Law School, J.D., with honors, 2017
    • University of Delaware, B.A., 2014
    • The George Washington University Law School, J.D., with honors, 2017
    • District of Columbia
    • Virginia
    • U.S. Court of Federal Claims
    • U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
    • District of Columbia
    • Virginia
    • U.S. Court of Federal Claims
    • U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

Zachary's Insights

Client Alert | 2 min read | 02.27.24

Yet Another Timeliness Trap for the Unsuspecting Protester: A Pre-Award Agency-Level Protest Is Functionally Denied as of the Closing Date for Receipt of Proposals, Even if the Agency Actually Denies it Later

Generally, a GAO protest challenging the terms of a solicitation is timely if filed within 10 days after the denial of an agency-level protest, “even if filed after bid opening or the closing time for receipt of proposals.”  4 C.F.R. § 21.2(a)(3).  Accordingly, the salient consideration for determining when that 10-day clock begins to run is when the agency denies the agency-level protest.  But in Marathon Medical Corp., B-422168.2, February 14, 2024, GAO held that if an agency has not ruled on a pre-award agency-level protest as of the closing date for receipt of proposals, then the protest is deemed denied as of that date—and the protester’s clock for filing a GAO protest begins to run—even if the agency later issues an actual decision denying the protest. ...

Representative Matters

  • Successfully defended the Army’s award of a large aircraft logistics support contract to a leading national defense contractor against protests by dominant providers of those services.
  • Successfully defended the award of a multimillion dollar Army fuel delivery contract against multiple protests before GAO.
  • Succeeded on multiple protests before both GAO and the U.S. Court of Federal Claims challenging the Department of Housing and Urban Development’s award of a large note servicing contract.
  • Counseled a leading national defense contractor on Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA) and indemnification remedies in relation to potential government disclosures of proprietary information.
  • Advised an international contractor on Buy America compliance for Federal Transit Administration funded procurements.

Zachary's Insights

Client Alert | 2 min read | 02.27.24

Yet Another Timeliness Trap for the Unsuspecting Protester: A Pre-Award Agency-Level Protest Is Functionally Denied as of the Closing Date for Receipt of Proposals, Even if the Agency Actually Denies it Later

Generally, a GAO protest challenging the terms of a solicitation is timely if filed within 10 days after the denial of an agency-level protest, “even if filed after bid opening or the closing time for receipt of proposals.”  4 C.F.R. § 21.2(a)(3).  Accordingly, the salient consideration for determining when that 10-day clock begins to run is when the agency denies the agency-level protest.  But in Marathon Medical Corp., B-422168.2, February 14, 2024, GAO held that if an agency has not ruled on a pre-award agency-level protest as of the closing date for receipt of proposals, then the protest is deemed denied as of that date—and the protester’s clock for filing a GAO protest begins to run—even if the agency later issues an actual decision denying the protest. ...

|

Zachary's Insights

Client Alert | 2 min read | 02.27.24

Yet Another Timeliness Trap for the Unsuspecting Protester: A Pre-Award Agency-Level Protest Is Functionally Denied as of the Closing Date for Receipt of Proposals, Even if the Agency Actually Denies it Later

Generally, a GAO protest challenging the terms of a solicitation is timely if filed within 10 days after the denial of an agency-level protest, “even if filed after bid opening or the closing time for receipt of proposals.”  4 C.F.R. § 21.2(a)(3).  Accordingly, the salient consideration for determining when that 10-day clock begins to run is when the agency denies the agency-level protest.  But in Marathon Medical Corp., B-422168.2, February 14, 2024, GAO held that if an agency has not ruled on a pre-award agency-level protest as of the closing date for receipt of proposals, then the protest is deemed denied as of that date—and the protester’s clock for filing a GAO protest begins to run—even if the agency later issues an actual decision denying the protest. ...