1. Home
  2. |Insights
  3. |The OFCCP Could Be Headed Your Way

The OFCCP Could Be Headed Your Way

Client Alert | 1 min read | 02.06.18

The Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs (OFCCP) mailed out 1,000 Corporate Scheduling Announcement Letters (CSAL) on February 1, 2018, giving government contractors some advance notice that they are on the scheduling list for a compliance review this fiscal year. The OFCCP will start mailing the actual scheduling letters (which triggers the 30-day response requirement) on March 19, 2018. The OFCCP has announced that no more than 10 establishments of an individual contractor will be on the scheduling list, and no more than four establishments of an individual contractor will be audited by a particular district office. Some good news for contractors – the agency also announced that no establishment with a review closed in the last five years will be scheduled for a compliance review this year; an increase from the previous two-year reprieve.

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....