Department of Defense Establishes Office of Strategic Capital to Enhance Investment in National Security Critical Technology
Client Alert | 2 min read | 12.08.22
On December 1, 2022, Department of Defense (DoD) Secretary Lloyd J. Austin III announced the establishment of the DoD Office of Strategic Capital (OSC). The mission statement of the OSC is to build an “enduring technical advantage” for the United States by helping partner contractors with private investment to develop national security critical technologies, including those related to advanced materials, next-generation biotechnology, and quantum science. OSC will coordinate with existing organizations such as the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) and the Defense Innovation Unit (DIU), which promotes acceleration of the military use of commercial technologies.
The OSC intends to offer what it characterizes as “patient” extended-term capital to help contractors obtain financing between the early laboratory-testing and prototyping phases and the full-scale development of products that can be used by the DoD warfighter. In addition to traditional vehicles like contracts and grants, this investment will likely take the form of loans and loan guarantees.
The OSC will provide a program-management and oversight function, including: (1) identifying and prioritizing promising critical-technology areas in industry and academia; (2) funding investments in critical-technology areas that the private sector has not, in DoD’s view, sufficiently supported; (3) informing and encouraging private-sector investment in DoD critical technology areas; and (4) contributing to the development of policies, policy implementation, and actions to protect industrial and technical capabilities in the private sector. DoD component heads are instructed to coordinate with the OSC Director on matters under their purview, and the DoD General Counsel will provide guidance to OSC on legal and ethics standards to apply to the Office.
Within 90 days, DoD will also establish a Strategic Capital Advisory Council (SCAC) that will include DoD Undersecretaries, the DoD General Counsel, the Director of Cost Assessment and Program Evaluation, and others. Within a second 90 days, the OSC Director will prepare a prospectus of initial-investment priorities for review by the Council and Secretary.
Key Takeaways:
From a contractor’s perspective, it remains to be seen exactly what form(s) this assistance will take—and with what strings attached. Among other things, industry should be on the lookout for intellectual-property (IP) provisions connected to loans, loan guarantees, contracts, grants, and other assistance stemming from OSC-directed investment, to determine whether IP will be governed by the standard FAR and DFARS approach to technical data, computer software, and subject inventions, or if OSC will look to more flexible terms, as are available (though not always used) in “other transaction” (OT) agreements. It also is likely that there will be limitations regarding foreign ownership, control, or influence of those receiving the funding and/or domestic preferences to ensure investment is used to promote domestic (and partner-country) capabilities.
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
