Proof Of Actual Bias Not Required To Show Conflict Of Interest
Client Alert | 1 min read | 12.07.06
Using the rarely-invoked exception to its timeliness rules for protests raising issues of widespread interest to the procurement community, the GAO in Celadon Laboratories, Inc., (http://www.gao.gov/decisions/bidpro/ 298533.pdf, Nov. 1, 2006) upheld a protest challenging an HHS decision not to fund the protester’s Small Business Innovation Research proposal, finding a conflict of interest where the members of the Special Emphasis Panel (SEP) that evaluated (and rejected) the proposal were employed by, or funded by, firms that support a competing technology. Because of the specific conflict information protester brought to the agency’s attention during the evaluation, GAO not only rejected HHS’s reliance on its SEP’s self-certification but also, rejected the argument that actual bias must be shown and instead concluded that in cases in which the evaluator has a conflict, prejudice is presumed.
Contacts
Insights
Client Alert | 6 min read | 06.16.26
What United States v. Bankman-Fried Means for Health Care Fraud Defense
On the surface, United States v. Bankman-Fried is a case about the collapse of a cryptocurrency exchange. But the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit’s recent opinion — affirming Samuel Bankman-Fried’s conviction on seven counts of fraud and conspiracy — carries important lessons that extend well beyond the world of digital assets.
Client Alert | 2 min read | 06.15.26
Kansas Federal Court Applies “Selective Enforcement” Theory to Reject DTSA Claim
Client Alert | 3 min read | 06.12.26
Client Alert | 4 min read | 06.12.26
Auto Dealers: The FTC Is Back in the Driver’s Seat — Warning Letters Signal Renewed Federal Scrutiny

