Potential Loss Of Workforce Supports Incumbent's Injunction
Client Alert | less than 1 min read | 06.16.05
The incumbent in University Research Co. v. U.S. (June 3, 2005), after demonstrating that the cost realism evaluation was flawed due to the improper normalization of a significant cost element, satisfied its showing of irreparable injury in part by arguing that it would lose some of its trained workforce if the awardee were allowed to take over the job while the case and a reevaluation proceeded. The Court of Federal Claims also noted that only in "an exceptional case" would procurement delay alone warrant denial of injunctive relief in a bid protest case.
Insights
Client Alert | 4 min read | 09.15.26
GAO Indicates Reasonable Conflict of Interest Investigation Must Include Inquiry of Involved Firm
The U.S. Government Accountability Office’s (GAO) recent decision in Viderity Inc.—Costs, B-424422.5, Sept. 1, 2026, offers useful insight into what constitutes a legally sufficient conflict of interest investigation. The decision arose in an unusual procedural posture: Viderity initially protested, alleging that an agency evaluator had a personal conflict of interest. After the agency took corrective action, Viderity filed a cost entitlement claim requesting that GAO direct the agency to reimburse Viderity’s protest costs. In evaluating that claim, GAO assessed whether Viderity’s underlying protest ground was “clearly meritorious.”
Client Alert | 3 min read | 09.15.26
Client Alert | 7 min read | 09.14.26
AI in Life Sciences: Ten Legal Considerations and Risks of AI Use in Drug Discovery and Development
Client Alert | 6 min read | 09.14.26
Mental Health Parity Bulletin Restates Best Practices for Evaluating Compliance
