On May 1, 2025, the Department of Defense announced the release of the long-anticipated 81-page Intellectual Property Guidebook for DoD Acquisition, which is aimed primarily at assisting acquisition professionals to develop, execute, and manage IP strategies that support functional area requirements and objectives across program life cycles. The Guidebook also provides guidance on the
John E. McCarthy Jr.
John E. McCarthy, Jr. is a partner in the Washington, D.C. office of Crowell & Moring and member of the firm's Government Contracts Group. John has spent more than thirty years litigating all forms of government contracts cases for both large and small government contractors, with a particular emphasis on bid protests. Because of John's strong engineering background, he has particular experience in technology related issues, including litigation regarding complex technology and data rights, patent and other intellectual property issues.
First Round of FAR Rewrites Released
On May 2, 2025, the Office of Federal Procurement Policy (“OFPP”) and the Federal Acquisition Regulatory Council (“FAR Council”) issued the first round of promised FAR rewrites—to Parts 1, 34, and 52—alongside a guidance memorandum for agencies subject to the FAR, Deviation Guidance to Support the Overhaul of the Federal Acquisition Regulation (“FAR Council Deviation Guidance”). The Office of Management and Budget also released a guidance memo, Overhauling the Federal Acquisition Regulation (“OMB Guidance”), that addresses the proposed implementation roadmap for the FAR overhaul. These initial FAR revisions follow the April 15, 2025 Executive Order (“EO”), Restoring Common Sense to Federal Procurement, which we previously reported on here.Continue Reading First Round of FAR Rewrites Released
Federal Circuit Affirms COFC Decision Limiting Infringement Damages to Copies of Software Actually Used Rather Than Made
In Bitmanagement Software GMBH v. United States, Case No. 23-1506 (Fed. Cir. Jan. 7, 2025), the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (Federal Circuit) denied the appeal of Bitmanagement Software Gmbh (Bitmanagement) challenging the Court of Federal Claims’ (COFC) $154,400 damages award, and denying its demand for $85 million in damages resulting from the Navy’s infringement of Bitmanagement’s software copyright. The Federal Circuit affirmed the COFC’s (1) use of a hypothetical negotiation approach to compute damages; and (2) decision to award damages using a “per use” rather than a “per copy” approach.Continue Reading Federal Circuit Affirms COFC Decision Limiting Infringement Damages to Copies of Software Actually Used Rather Than Made
A Common-Sense Change to the Continuous SAM Registration Requirement at FAR 52.204 7
On November 12, 2024, the Department of Defense (DoD), General Services Administration (GSA), and National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) will issue an interim rule amending FAR 52.204-7 to clarify that an offeror’s failure to maintain System for Award Management (SAM) registration during the period between proposal submission and contract award does not render the offeror ineligible for award. Providing welcome relief to agencies and contractors alike, the interim rule requires only that an offeror be registered in SAM at the time of offer submission and at the time of contract award.Continue Reading A Common-Sense Change to the Continuous SAM Registration Requirement at FAR 52.204 7
Contractor’s Copyright Infringement Claims Raise Issues That “Must be Addressed at Trial”
On May 3, 2024, in Geospatial Technology Associates, LLC v. United States, COFC No. 16-346C, the U.S. Court of Federal Claims denied the government’s motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction and, alternatively, for summary judgment due to alleged inaccuracies in a copyright registration, holding that plaintiff Geospatial Technology Associates, LLC’s (“plaintiff” or “GTA”) patent and copyright infringement claims pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1498 raise issues that “must be addressed at trial.” This newest development follows GTA’s original March 2016 lawsuit against several government agencies—including the Department of the Army, the Department of the Air Force, and the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency (“NGA”)—alleging patent and copyright infringement of the underlying software code of its product, “NINJA.pro.” Continue Reading Contractor’s Copyright Infringement Claims Raise Issues That “Must be Addressed at Trial”
Just Trust Me on This: Allegation of Contract’s Existence Is Sufficient to Establish Jurisdiction Under Contract Disputes Act
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit held in Avue Technologies Corp. v. Department of Health and Human Services that an appellant’s non-frivolous allegation of a contract with the government via an end-user license agreement (EULA) incorporated into another contractor’s Federal Supply Schedule (FSS) agreement was sufficient to establish jurisdiction under the Contract Disputes Act (CDA).Continue Reading Just Trust Me on This: Allegation of Contract’s Existence Is Sufficient to Establish Jurisdiction Under Contract Disputes Act
Yet Another Timeliness Trap for the Unsuspecting Protester: A Pre-Award Agency-Level Protest Is Functionally Denied as of the Closing Date for Receipt of Proposals, Even if the Agency Actually Denies it Later
Generally, a GAO protest challenging the terms of a solicitation is timely if filed within 10 days after the denial of an agency-level protest, “even if filed after bid opening or the closing time for receipt of proposals.” 4 C.F.R. § 21.2(a)(3). Accordingly, the salient consideration for determining when that 10-day clock begins to run is when the agency denies the agency-level protest. But in Marathon Medical Corp., B-422168.2, February 14, 2024, GAO held that if an agency has not ruled on a pre-award agency-level protest as of the closing date for receipt of proposals, then the protest is deemed denied as of that date—and the protester’s clock for filing a GAO protest begins to run—even if the agency later issues an actual decision denying the protest. Continue Reading Yet Another Timeliness Trap for the Unsuspecting Protester: A Pre-Award Agency-Level Protest Is Functionally Denied as of the Closing Date for Receipt of Proposals, Even if the Agency Actually Denies it Later
Current Participants in the SBA 8(a) Program – Be on the Lookout for Outreach on Social Disadvantage
The Small Business Administration has begun outreach to current participants in its 8(a) Business Development Program regarding the impact of the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Tennessee’s July 19, 2023 decision enjoining SBA from applying a rebuttable presumption of social disadvantage to individuals of certain racial and ethnic groups.
For 8(a) Participants whose program eligibility is based upon one or more individuals that relied upon the presumption of social disadvantage based on their membership in one of the identified groups (such as Asian Pacific Americans, Black Americans, Hispanic Americans, Subcontinent Asian Americans, and Native Americans), such participants will be required to establish their individual social disadvantage by completing a social disadvantage narrative. No new 8(a) contracts can be awarded to these entities until SBA affirmatively determines that the individual(s) upon whom eligibility is based has established personal social disadvantage. Continue Reading Current Participants in the SBA 8(a) Program – Be on the Lookout for Outreach on Social Disadvantage
DFARS Proposed Rule on SBIR/STTR Data Rights and the Marking of Unlimited Rights Data
On December 19, 2022, DoD issued a DFARS proposed rule that seeks to (1) implement the data-rights portions of the May 2, 2019 Small Business Innovation Research Program and Small Business Technology Transfer Program Policy Directive (SBIR/STTR Policy Directive), and (2) impose significant changes to technical data and computer software marking requirements. The SBIR/STTR portion of the proposed rule follows DoD’s advance notice of proposed rulemaking issued on August 31, 2020 (see 85 FR 53758) and incorporates the eight written public comments that DoD received. The proposed changes to marking requirements go beyond the SBIR/STTR Policy Directive and respond to the Federal Circuit’s decision in The Boeing Co. v. Secretary of the Air Force, 983 F.3d 1321 (Fed. Cir. 2020). Continue Reading DFARS Proposed Rule on SBIR/STTR Data Rights and the Marking of Unlimited Rights Data
FY 2023 National Defense Authorization Act: Key Provisions Government Contractors Should Know
The National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for Fiscal Year (FY) 2023, signed into law on December 23, 2022, makes numerous changes to acquisition policy. Crowell & Moring’s Government Contracts Group discusses the most consequential changes for government contractors here. These include changes that provide new opportunities for contractors to recover inflation-related costs, authorize new programs for small businesses, impose new clauses or reporting requirements on government contractors, require government reporting to Congress on acquisition authorities and programs, and alter other processes and procedures to which government contractors are subject. The FY 2023 NDAA also includes the Advancing American AI Act, the Intelligence Authorization Act for FY 2023, and the Water Resources Development Act of 2022, all of which include provisions relevant for government contractors. Continue Reading FY 2023 National Defense Authorization Act: Key Provisions Government Contractors Should Know