1. Home
  2. |Insights
  3. |GAO Finds Eight Days Insufficient for FPR Response

GAO Finds Eight Days Insufficient for FPR Response

Client Alert | 1 min read | 12.03.19

In a recently published decision, MCR Federal, LLC, GAO sustained a protest challenging the required response date for final proposal revisions in a task order procurement. Specifically, as part of its voluntary corrective action in response to an earlier post award protest by MCR, the agency issued MCR two “interchange notices” stating concerns related to experience levels and the contingent-hire nature of the majority of MCR’s proposed staffing, and permitting MCR two days to “either revise or confirm” its proposal. MCR again protested that the allotted two days were insufficient. In response, the agency extended the deadline to a total of eight days and then moved to dismiss. GAO declined to dismiss. Instead, it sustained MCR’s protest, finding eight days insufficient to provide MCR a fair opportunity to improve its proposal. Subsequently, GAO dismissed the agency’s reconsideration request and declined to recommend a specific time period for final proposal revisions. 


Contacts

Insights

Client Alert | 3 min read | 11.13.26

Massachusetts Trade Secret Preliminary Injunctions: Prove the Harm, Tailor the Relief

A strong trade secret claim is not a substitute for proof of irreparable harm. In Daikin Applied Americas Inc. v. Russo, No. SJC-13881 (Mass. Oct. 14, 2026), the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court held that likely success on a misappropriation claim does not create a presumption of irreparable harm. The court grounded its ruling in both the Massachusetts Uniform Trade Secrets Act and the traditional equitable principles the statute incorporates. It required a case-specific showing that the requested relief would prevent harm that a final judgment could not adequately remedy. ...