Silence = Acquiescence: Government Stuck with Contractor’s Interpretation that was Provided with its Proposal
Client Alert | 1 min read | 03.18.20
On February 7, 2020, the ASBCA sustained the appeal of Command Languages, Inc. d/b/a CLI Solutions (CLI) against the Army over increased costs to translate technical manuals. CLI contracted with the Army to translate advanced level armored vehicle maintenance manuals for use by the Afghanistan Army. The advanced level manuals included tasks from basic level manuals, but CLI only incorporated these tasks by reference – the tasks themselves were not translated. CLI and the Army disagreed over whether contract language stating that the basic manuals were provided to the contractor as government furnished information (GFI) “for reference” permitted CLI to incorporate information from them by reference. The Board found that CLI’s contract interpretation was reasonable, given that CLI notified the Army of its intent to use this reference-only approach and provided sample manuals, and the Army had no objections to this approach prior to performance. The Board pointed out that the contract gave CLI the option to utilize GFI in the “most effective” manner of its choosing when creating the advanced manuals, and there was no contract language prohibiting CLI’s method. The Board also found that the Army did not challenge CLI’s approach until after performance started.
Contacts
Insights
Client Alert | 3 min read | 11.21.25
On November 7, 2025, in Thornton v. National Academy of Sciences, No. 25-cv-2155, 2025 WL 3123732 (D.D.C. Nov. 7, 2025), the District Court for the District of Columbia dismissed a False Claims Act (FCA) retaliation complaint on the basis that the plaintiff’s allegations that he was fired after blowing the whistle on purported illegally discriminatory use of federal funding was not sufficient to support his FCA claim. This case appears to be one of the first filed, and subsequently dismissed, following Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche’s announcement of the creation of the Civil Rights Fraud Initiative on May 19, 2025, which “strongly encourages” private individuals to file lawsuits under the FCA relating to purportedly discriminatory and illegal use of federal funding for diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives in violation of Executive Order 14173, Ending Illegal Discrimination and Restoring Merit-Based Opportunity (Jan. 21, 2025). In this case, the court dismissed the FCA retaliation claim and rejected the argument that an organization could violate the FCA merely by “engaging in discriminatory conduct while conducting a federally funded study.” The analysis in Thornton could be a sign of how forthcoming arguments of retaliation based on reporting allegedly fraudulent DEI activity will be analyzed in the future.
Client Alert | 3 min read | 11.20.25
Client Alert | 3 min read | 11.20.25
Client Alert | 6 min read | 11.19.25
