Congress Turns its Sights to DCAA Audit Backlog
Client Alert | 1 min read | 10.26.17
On October 20, 2017, Senator Claire McCaskill, Ranking Member of the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, issued a letter to David Norquist, Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller)/Chief Financial Officer requesting “detailed information” about the Defense Contract Audit Agency’s audit backlog, in what appears to be a follow up to the September 2017 GAO Report (discussed here), which found that “DCAA failed to meet its original goal of eliminating the backlog of audits more than two years old” by the end of Fiscal Year 2016 – a goal that DCAA now believes “will be challenging to meet” by the end of Fiscal Year 2018. The letter asked DoD to provide a written response by November 10, 2017 regarding: (1) DCAA’s “current inventory of incurred cost audits”; (2) “the plans and expected timeline for reducing DCAA’s audit backlog to 18 months of inventory”; and (3) the current status and timeline for DoD to complete its “plans to assess and implement options for reducing the length of time to begin incurred cost audit work,” and “conduct a comprehensive analysis regarding the use and effect of multi-year audits by March 31, 2018.”
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


