31-Month Suspension of Affiliates Violates FAR
Client Alert | 1 min read | 07.06.12
In Agility Def. and Gov't Servs. (June 26), an Alabama District Court rejected the government's assertion that an agency's suspension of a government contractor is beyond judicial review and overturned the suspensions because they had exceeded 18 months, in violation of FAR 9.407-4(b). The two plaintiffs were suspended in November 2009 based on their affiliation with an indicted contractor, Public Warehousing Company, and, although the initial suspension of the affiliates was proper, the agency could not extend the suspensions of the affiliates beyond 18 months because legal proceedings had not been initiated against the affiliates themselves.
Insights
Client Alert | 8 min read | 06.06.25
Litigation Funding Reforms: Clarity for UK Funders and Litigants Post-PACCAR
On 2 June 2025 the Civil Justice Council (a UK public body that advises on civil justice and civil procedure) (“CJC”) issued its Review of Litigation Funding Final Report (the “Report”). The CJC has provided comprehensive recommendations on the regulation and reform of litigation funding in England and Wales. The highlight recommendation of the Report is for the UK Government to remove third party litigation funding from the regulations and requirements of the Damages-Based Agreements Regulations 2013 (“DBA Regulations”), reversing the judgment of the Supreme Court in PACCAR.[1] Meanwhile, the UK Court of Appeal has recently endorsed a position that the Competition Appeal Tribunal (“CAT”) may order that third party funders of collective proceedings be paid first from litigation proceeds before claimants according to waterfall provisions in their funding agreements.
Client Alert | 2 min read | 06.06.25
Supreme Court Dismisses Cert Petition On Uninjured Class Members As Improvidently Granted
Client Alert | 2 min read | 06.06.25
Client Alert | 2 min read | 06.06.25
USPTO Director Clarifies Burden on IPR Petitioners Relying on Prior Art Cited During Prosecution
