DCAA's Use of a Statistically Invalid Analysis for Testing Compensation Reasonableness
Client Alert | less than 1 min read | 02.03.12
The ASBCA in J.F. Taylor, Inc. (Jan. 18, 2012) rejected DCAA’s disallowance of executive compensation, based primarily on the credibility of differing expert opinions. The board concluded that the standard DCAA analysis relying on a “rule of reason” that permits compensation within 10% of the 50th percentile of an unweighted average of multiple surveys with different sample sizes is statistically invalid, at least in part because the contractor’s expert was credible and the government’s, who had included in his resume what was arguably a mail order PhD from a South African “university,” was not.
Insights
Client Alert | 7 min read | 10.29.26
On 8 October 2026, Crowell & Moring, King's College London, and the Competition Law Center at George Washington University co-hosted the 7th EU Competition Law Conference at De Warande in Brussels. Mark Meador, Commissioner at the US Federal Trade Commission (FTC), delivered the opening keynote address, followed by four panels bringing together practitioners, regulators, academics, and in-house counsel to discuss the latest developments in EU, UK, and US competition law enforcement. Among other things, the panels examined algorithmic pricing; the European Commission's (Commission) new guidelines on exclusionary abuses under Article 102 TFEU (Article 102 Guidelines); the impact of dominant positions in merger reviews; and lessons from the enforcement of the Digital Markets Act (DMA) and the UK’s Digital Markets, Competition and Consumers Act.
Client Alert | 3 min read | 10.29.26
What University Licensors Should Learn From TexasLDPC v. Broadcom
Client Alert | 2 min read | 10.28.26
Debriefing to Dead Briefing: How to Avoid Dismissal by Identifying “Required” Debriefings
Client Alert | 7 min read | 10.27.26
