Our law firm secured an entitlement ruling for a dredging contractor in a $5.7 million claim against the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. The Armed Services Board of Contract Appeals (ASBCA) ruled that the government withheld superior knowledge and issued defective specifications concerning a 2022 dredging project located in Newburyport Harbor, Massachusetts.

In this case, the government awarded our client a contract to dredge a harbor channel. Following contract award, the contractor attempted to self-perform dredging using a cutterhead dredge, but soon found that the channel sea conditions were more severe than stated in the solicitation. The contractor was unable to self-perform and was eventually forced to subcontract dredging to a larger, ocean-going dredge, at added cost.

Continue Reading Cohen Seglias Obtains Entitlement Ruling on $5.7 Million Dredging Dispute
Online digital document inspection or assessment evaluation on laptop computer, contract review, analysis, inspection of agreement contract, compliance verification. Vector illustration

The FAR Council has been rolling out piecemeal revisions to the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) as directed by executive order “Restoring Common Sense to Federal Procurement.” For background on the broader goals and implications of this reform effort, see our earlier post, “Understanding the Overhaul of Federal Procurement Regulations.”

To date, the FAR Council has promulgated proposed revisions to Parts 1, 10, 11, 18, 34, 39, 43, and 52 of the FAR. While these revisions are subject to traditional notice-and-comment procedures, federal agencies are using reasonable efforts to implement the FAR Council’s proposed changes before they are finalized. Below is a summary of the proposed revisions that federal contractors should be watching.

What’s Already Changed: Key FAR Revisions to Parts 1, 34, and 52

For a breakdown of the earlier updates issued under the same executive order, read our previous client alert, “The Revolutionary FAR Overhaul: What Federal Contractors Need to Know.”

Continue Reading FAR Reform in Progress: Breaking Down the Latest Proposed Revisions
Capitol Building

On April 15, 2025, President Trump issued Executive Order 14275 and directed wide-sweeping revisions to the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) to make the federal procurement process more efficient. As discussed in our earlier client alert, “Revolutionary Changes Ahead: Understanding the Overhaul of Federal Procurement Regulations,” this Executive Order marked the beginning of a comprehensive effort to streamline and deregulate the FAR. In line with this directive, on May 2, 2025, the Office of Federal Procurement Policy (OFFP) published the first wave of proposed revisions, focusing on FAR Part 1 (Federal Acquisition Regulations System), Part 34 (Major System Acquisition), and Part 52 (Solicitation Provisions and Contract Clauses).

OFFP’s issuance of FAR rewrites coincides with the Office of Management and Budget (OMB)’s memorandum to the heads of executive departments and agencies announcing OFFP’s lead in a revolutionary overhaul of the FAR. On the same day, the FAR Council also issued Deviation Guidance regarding the FAR’s overhaul. The FAR Council advised agencies to issue agency-specific deviations implementing the FAR Council’s deregulated coverage within 30 days after the release of the model deviation text. The memorandum explains that while the FAR Council intends to begin formal rulemaking regarding the new proposed language, the OMB encourages agencies to make the deviated FAR language effective immediately until the new FAR language becomes final.

Continue Reading The Revolutionary FAR Overhaul: What Federal Contractors Need to Know
Digital Age- Ai Regulation- Technology United States Government

Despite a change in administrations, the government’s vigilance and enforcement of cybersecurity requirements have not missed a beat. On March 14, 2025, MORSECORP, Inc. of Cambridge, MA resolved allegations that it had submitted false claims to the government under contracts with the Departments of the Army and the Air Force. Pursuant to a settlement with the Department of Justice, MORSECORP “admitted, acknowledged, and accepted responsibility” for failing to ensure that a third-party company that hosted MORSECORP’s emails met security requirements equivalent to the Federal Risk and Authorization Management Program (FedRAMP) moderate baseline and that this third-party complied with cybersecurity requirements under DFARS 252.204-7012(c)-(g). MORSECORP also admitted that it did not fully implement all cybersecurity controls in NIST SP 800-171, some of which, absent implementation, could have led to the exfiltration of controlled defense information. Additionally, MORSECORP did not have the required written system security plans for its covered information systems.

Continue Reading Cybersecurity Enforcement: The More Things Change, The More They Stay the Same
White House

The Trump administration recently announced three significant initiatives to reshape the federal procurement landscape. These include three new executive orders aimed at modernizing defense acquisitions, reforming foreign defense sales, and—perhaps most consequential—restoring common sense to federal procurement practices.

  1. Modernizing Defense Acquisitions and Spurring Innovation in the Defense Industrial Base (April 9, 2025)
  2. Reforming Foreign Defense Sales to Improve Speed and Accountability (April 9, 2025)
  3. Restoring Common Sense to Federal Procurement (April 15, 2025)
Continue Reading Revolutionary Changes Ahead: Understanding the Overhaul of Federal Procurement Regulations
Judge gavel or auction hammer icon with long shadow.

Project Labor Agreements (PLAs) have been controversial in the construction industry. On January 21, 2025, the United States Court of Federal Claims issued a ruling in MVL USA, Inc. et al. v. The United States that found that PLAs violate the Competition in Contracting Act (CICA). The court’s ruling is a major victory for construction contractors who have long argued that PLAs are anti-competitive. The ruling resulted from multiple consolidated bid protests that challenged the legality of mandatory PLAs in federal construction contracts, specifically as mandated by Executive Order 14063 and implemented through Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) provisions.

Although the decision only applies to the solicitations that were the subject of the bid protest, it is also possible that the Trump Administration will repeal the executive order that gave rise to the protest. In the meantime, it is likely that a bid protest on any pending or future solicitation that contains a PLA requirement will be sustained.

Continue Reading Court Rules that PLAs Violate the Competition in Contracting Act
Change Ahead Sign

A contractor who is proposed for debarment is effectively debarred as soon as the notice letter is received. It is like being sentenced before trial, and it can take weeks or months for the contractor to convince the debarring official that the proposed debarment should be lifted. A new rule, effective January 17, 2025, amends the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) to improve consistency between procurement and non-procurement procedures regarding suspension and debarment but does not remove the exclusionary effect of a proposed debarment. The final rule, a collaboration between the Department of Defense (DoD), General Services Administration (GSA), and National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), is purportedly intended to make the process more transparent and fair.

Continue Reading Changes to the Suspension and Debarment Rules in 2025
Human hand giving money to other hand vector illustration

Contractors often seek to recover attorney’s fees if they successfully present and resolve a claim, either through a negotiated settlement or litigation. In reality, of course, the government usually requires a waiver of Equal Access to Justice Act (EAJA) fees as part of a settlement. When winning or partially winning a case before a board or court, a contractor has the right to file an Application for Attorney’s Fees to recover attorney’s fees subject to the statutory limit of $125/hour and various upward adjustments for inflation. Unfortunately, winning is not always enough.

Continue Reading The Hidden Hurdle: Why Recovering Legal Fees Under EAJA Is Not a Guarantee for Contractors
Computer laptop online protection shield on internet browser web site or pc with secure connection website vector flat cartoon illustration, security or privacy data access modern design image

On August 22, 2024, the Department of Justice (DOJ) filed a complaint-in-intervention in a previously filed whistleblower suit under the qui tam provisions of the False Claims Act (FCA) against the Georgia Institute of Technology (Georgia Tech) and Georgia Tech Research Corp. (GTRC), an affiliate of Georgie Tech, for falsely representing its compliance with Department of Defense (DoD) cybersecurity requirements. Former and current Georgia Tech cybersecurity team employees brought the initial whistleblower lawsuit.

Continue Reading DOJ Looks To Sting Georgia Tech Under the False Claims Act: The Perils of Cybersecurity Non-Compliance
Two construction workers arguing on either side of a pole

Under the Small Business Administration’s (SBA) mentor-protégé program, smaller businesses are afforded the tools to compete for government contracts by partnering with larger businesses that serve as mentors to the small businesses. In theory, both the mentor and the protégé benefit under the program, with the mentor gaining access to set-aside small business contracts that it would not otherwise be eligible for and the protégé receiving the advantages of the mentor’s experience, knowledge, and resources. But what happens when the two businesses do not get along, and one company is ready to give the boot to the other? The case between Yorktown Systems Group, Inc. and Threat Tec provides some helpful insight.

Continue Reading Mentor-Protégé Program Pitfalls: Insights from Yorktown and Threat Tec’s Dispute