To embed, copy and paste the code into your website or blog:
On January 20, 2021, the first day of the Biden Administration, the President took several executive actions that affect government contractors. The President is expected to sign an additional Executive Order (EO) today that addresses several federal worker issues.
First, the President rescinded several Executive Orders (EOs) issued by the prior administration that either directly affected contractors or the regulatory process as a whole.
Section 10 of the Executive Order on Advancing Racial Equity and Support for Underserved Communities Through the Federal Government rescinds Executive Order 13950, Combating Race and Sex Stereotyping. EO 13950 had prohibited certain types of training programs by contractors and federal grantees and imposed serious sanctions for contractors or grantees who ran afoul of the EOs limitations. Section 10 also instructs agencies to consider actions to suspend agency actions arising fr
Purchase Agreement Components, Part 2: Indemnification Provisions, January 8, 2021, Frank Massaro
In an acquisition, particularly an equity acquisition, a buyer must perform extensive due diligence on the target company to understand, as thoroughly as possible, the risks associated with the acquisition. In most cases, however, the buyer cannot fully evaluate or even identify all sources of risk that it will assume post-closing. To address these uncertainties and allocate these potential risks, the buyer and seller negotiate indemnification provisions that set forth the scope of each party’s obligation to reimburse the other party for certain losses associated with the acquisition that may arise following closing.
To embed, copy and paste the code into your website or blog:
The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit reversed an Armed Services Board of Contract Appeals (ASBCA) denial of summary judgment and held that a federal contractor may include certain restrictive markings on “unlimited rights” data supplied to the US government.
The Boeing Company v. Secretary of the Air Force, Case No. 19-2147 (Fed. Cir. Dec. 21, 2020) (Lourie, J.)
Boeing entered into two contracts with the US Air Force that required Boeing to deliver technical data to the Air Force with “unlimited rights” pursuant to Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement 252.227-7013 (-7013 clause). Boeing marked each technical data deliverable submitted to the Air Force with a legend that described Boeing’s data rights pertaining to third parties. The government rejected Boeing’s technical data deliverables in view of the legend Boeing placed on the data, and Boeing requested a Contracting Officer Final
Thursday, January 7, 2021
The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit reversed an Armed Services Board of Contract Appeals (ASBCA) denial of summary judgment and held that a federal contractor may include certain restrictive markings on “unlimited rights” data supplied to the US government.
The Boeing Company v. Secretary of the Air Force, Case No. 19-2147 (Fed. Cir. Dec. 21, 2020) (Lourie, J.)
Boeing entered into two contracts with the US Air Force that required Boeing to deliver technical data to the Air Force with “unlimited rights” pursuant to Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement 252.227-7013 (-7013 clause). Boeing marked each technical data deliverable submitted to the Air Force with a legend that described Boeing’s data rights pertaining to third parties. The government rejected Boeing’s technical data deliverables in view of the legend Boeing placed on the data, and Boeing requested a Contracting Officer Final Decision (COFD) regardi
National Defense Authorization Act
As we noted last month, House Armed Services Committee (“HASC”) and Senate Armed Services Committee (“SASC”) staff had been conferencing the National Defense Authorization Act (“NDAA”), Congress’ annual defense policy bill, since mid-August. On November 18, 2020, the Senate and House began formal conference committee proceedings to resolve and reconcile the remaining major sticking points of the House and Senate versions of the bill.
On December 8, 2020, the House passed the reconciled version of the bill, otherwise known as the conference report, by a vote of 335-78. The Senate followed suit on December 11, 2020, passing the bill by a vote of 84-13. The President vetoed the bill on December 23, 2020 as was widely expected. The President had long threatened to veto the bill if it did not include a repeal of Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, which prevents social media websites from being held liable for users’ comm