1. Home
  2. |Insights
  3. |"Yardstick" Measures Failure to Progress in A-12 Default Termination

"Yardstick" Measures Failure to Progress in A-12 Default Termination

Client Alert | 1 min read | 05.11.07

In the latest opinion in the 16-year A-12 litigation, McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. United States, No. 91-1204C (Fed. Cl. May 3, 2007) the Court of Federal Claims, on remand from the Federal Circuit, upheld default termination of the fixed-price research and development contract based upon a failure to make progress -- even though the full contract "had no completion date at [the time of] termination." With no completion date for the full contract, the Court instead used a "yardstick" to measure the contractors' progress, holding that (1) the Court could use a series of interim deadlines for the production of prototype aircraft to define both the "performance required" and the "time remaining for performance"; and (2) at the time of termination, there was sufficient information available for the contracting officer to have concluded there was no reasonable likelihood of delivery under those deadlines (even if the contracting officer did not, in the event, make the default termination decision based upon that "available" information).

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.”...