Issac D. Schabes
Overview
Issac D. Schabes assists government contractors, big and small businesses alike, in a wide range of government contracts litigation and counseling matters. Issac is particularly adept at helping contractors protect their interests in bid protest proceedings at the Government Accountability Office, the U.S. Court of Federal Claims, federal procuring agencies, and state and local contracting agencies. Drawing on his prior law clerk experience at the U.S. Court of Federal Claims, Issac understands the complex and strategic decision-making that fuels a successful protest or defense of a government contract.
Career & Education
- Maryland
Law Clerk, Honorable Robert N. McDonald, Supreme Court of Maryland, 2019–2020 - U.S. Court of Federal Claims
Law Clerk, Honorable Matthew H. Solomson, 2020–2021
- Maryland
- Ner Israel College, B.A., 2009
- University of Maryland Carey School of Law, J.D., magna cum laude, Order of the Coif, 2019
- District of Columbia
- Maryland
- U.S. Court of Federal Claims
- Vice Chair, ABA PCLS Bid Protest Committe
- Member, U.S. Court of Federal Claims Advisory Council
Issac's Insights
Client Alert | 3 min read | 02.03.25
COFC Holds That Federal PLA Mandate Is Unlawful; Reinterprets Blue and Gold Waiver Rule
In MVL USA, Inc. et al. v. United States, the United States Court of Federal Claims (“COFC”) held that the provisions of FAR 22.505, 52.222-33 and 52.222-34 (collectively, the “PLA mandate”), which required the use of project labor agreements (“PLAs”) on large-scale federal construction projects valued above or at a certain threshold, violated the Competition in Contracting Act (“CICA”). As we previously reported here, former-President Biden issued Executive Order 14063 in February 2022, instructing federal agencies to require construction contractors and subcontractors on projects valued at $35 million or more to “agree, for that project, to negotiate or become a party to” a PLA. A few months later, the FAR Council promulgated a final rule implementing the executive order in FAR 22.505, 52.222-33 and 52.222-34.
Client Alert | 2 min read | 01.27.25
State Department Pauses Almost All Foreign Assistance Funding
Client Alert | 1 min read | 01.10.25
FAR Council Withdraws Proposed Mandatory Climate Disclosures for Federal Contractor Rule
Firm News | 9 min read | 01.02.25
Crowell & Moring Elects 12 New Partners, Promotes Four to Senior Counsel and 25 to Counsel
Representative Matters
- Successfully protested Air Force’s award of $300 million contract for adversarial training services by obtaining agency corrective action and won recommendation for reimbursement of protest costs.
- Successfully protested U.S. Secret Service award of $18 million contract for cellular communications services and equipment.
- Successfully defended against protest challenging Administrative Office of the U.S. Court’s multiple award contract with total estimated value of $1.5 billion.
- Successfully defended against protest challenging Department of Defense award of $240 million contract for the TRI-GSM program.
- Successfully protested GSA’s award of a $678 million contract for systems engineering and integration services by obtaining agency corrective action.
Issac's Insights
Client Alert | 3 min read | 02.03.25
COFC Holds That Federal PLA Mandate Is Unlawful; Reinterprets Blue and Gold Waiver Rule
In MVL USA, Inc. et al. v. United States, the United States Court of Federal Claims (“COFC”) held that the provisions of FAR 22.505, 52.222-33 and 52.222-34 (collectively, the “PLA mandate”), which required the use of project labor agreements (“PLAs”) on large-scale federal construction projects valued above or at a certain threshold, violated the Competition in Contracting Act (“CICA”). As we previously reported here, former-President Biden issued Executive Order 14063 in February 2022, instructing federal agencies to require construction contractors and subcontractors on projects valued at $35 million or more to “agree, for that project, to negotiate or become a party to” a PLA. A few months later, the FAR Council promulgated a final rule implementing the executive order in FAR 22.505, 52.222-33 and 52.222-34.
Client Alert | 2 min read | 01.27.25
State Department Pauses Almost All Foreign Assistance Funding
Client Alert | 1 min read | 01.10.25
FAR Council Withdraws Proposed Mandatory Climate Disclosures for Federal Contractor Rule
Firm News | 9 min read | 01.02.25
Crowell & Moring Elects 12 New Partners, Promotes Four to Senior Counsel and 25 to Counsel
Insights
- |
July, 2023
Thomson Reuters - The Nash & Cibinic Report
Voluntary Stay Strategies and Considerations: Bid Protests at the U.S. Court of Federal Claims and the U.S. Government Accountability Office,
|03.12.21
ABA Federal Procurement Institute
- |
03.11.22
Crowell & Moring’s Government Contracts Legal Forum
Issac's Insights
Client Alert | 3 min read | 02.03.25
COFC Holds That Federal PLA Mandate Is Unlawful; Reinterprets Blue and Gold Waiver Rule
In MVL USA, Inc. et al. v. United States, the United States Court of Federal Claims (“COFC”) held that the provisions of FAR 22.505, 52.222-33 and 52.222-34 (collectively, the “PLA mandate”), which required the use of project labor agreements (“PLAs”) on large-scale federal construction projects valued above or at a certain threshold, violated the Competition in Contracting Act (“CICA”). As we previously reported here, former-President Biden issued Executive Order 14063 in February 2022, instructing federal agencies to require construction contractors and subcontractors on projects valued at $35 million or more to “agree, for that project, to negotiate or become a party to” a PLA. A few months later, the FAR Council promulgated a final rule implementing the executive order in FAR 22.505, 52.222-33 and 52.222-34.
Client Alert | 2 min read | 01.27.25
State Department Pauses Almost All Foreign Assistance Funding
Client Alert | 1 min read | 01.10.25
FAR Council Withdraws Proposed Mandatory Climate Disclosures for Federal Contractor Rule
Firm News | 9 min read | 01.02.25
Crowell & Moring Elects 12 New Partners, Promotes Four to Senior Counsel and 25 to Counsel
