GAO Sends Agency Back To The Drawing Board -- Again
Client Alert | less than 1 min read | 01.13.09
When Nortel, represented by C&M, challenged DEA's award of an IT services contract based on a possible OCI, DEA decided to take corrective action after GAO's "outcome prediction" alternative dispute resolution conference. DEA reaffirmed its selection, and in round two in Nortel Gov't Solutions, Inc. (Dec. 30, 2008), GAO found that DEA had (1) still failed to determine the extent of the awardee's OCI and (2) unreasonably concluded that the awardee's mitigation plan was acceptable when the awardee would be required to review and provide input on designs it proposed under a separate contract with DEA.
Contacts
Insights
Client Alert | 3 min read | 07.23.26
It is well established that “[c]ompetitive prejudice is an essential element of every viable protest.” Yet, for decades, the U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) has tempered this requirement with two critical corollaries: protesters need only demonstrate a “reasonable possibility” that they were prejudiced by an agency’s actions, and GAO “will resolve doubts regarding prejudice in favor of the protester.” These principles have been consistent features of GAO’s bid protest jurisprudence for more than 30 years. See, e.g., United Int’l Eng'g, Inc., B-245448, Jan. 29, 1992, 71 CPD ¶ 177.
Client Alert | 3 min read | 07.23.26
Second Circuit Affirms Preliminary Injunction Against Nielsen in Constructive Tying Case
Client Alert | 4 min read | 07.22.26
Client Alert | 4 min read | 07.22.26
Ghost Advertising: Compliance Takeaways From the Gymshark Influencer Class Action
