• Share
  • Email
  • Print

K&L Gates’ government contracts and procurement policy practice spans the globe, with a core of practitioners located throughout the United States and in Europe.

The practice group assists public sector procurement clients worldwide in regulatory, transactional, and litigation matters. When appropriate, practice group lawyers team with lawyers in related practice areas, including government enforcement, policy and regulatory, IP, M&A, and construction and engineering, among others.

This multidisciplinary, firmwide approach gives clients seamless access to specialized advice so that they can make the best decisions for their projects and execute those decisions in the most efficient and effective manner.

Areas of Practice

NameTitleOfficeContact
Associate
P +1.202.778.9887
Associate
P +49.(0)30.220.029.306
Associate
P +1.412.355.6305
Of Counsel
P +1.305.539.3320
Partner
P +1.415.882.8005
Partner
P +1.206.370.7815
Of Counsel
P +1.717.231.5817
Associate
P +1.202.778.9468
Partner
P +1.202.778.9106
Associate
P +49.(0)30.220.029.356
Partner
P +1.415.882.8006
Senior Associate
P +48.22.653.4270
Partner
P +1.202.778.9420
Associate
P +1.202.778.9180
Counsel
P +48.22.653.4266
Partner
P +1.202.778.9284
Associate
P +1.206.370.8092
Partner
P +49.(0)30.220.029.355
Partner
P +1.202.778.9428
Partner
P +1.704.331.7417
Partner
P +1.412.355.6260
Partner
P +48.22.653.4205
Showing 1-10 of 80 results
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8   Next >
Alternative Dispute Resolution
Served as co-counsel with a major London firm on disputes totaling hundreds of millions of dollars in connection with the problematic performance of a large NATO program for the design and construction of one of the first centralized air command and control centers; arbitrated the dispute before an International Chamber of Commerce tribunal in London, secured a favorable resolution; developed and employed unique techniques for electronic document storage and presentation and, at the request of the Chairman of the arbitration tribunal in the matter, demonstrated and presented electronic storage and presentation techniques to the London Court of International Arbitration and the German Arbitration Institute.
Represented government contracts clients in numerous mini-trials and mediations, securing favorable outcomes.
Bid Protests
Lockheed, IMS, B-248686, 92-2 CPD ¶ 180: Represented protestor, a systems integrator, in challenging award of substantial HHS child support network contract on grounds that cost evaluation was inconsistent with evaluation scheme and that cost/technical tradeoff was flawed because proper “total cost” evaluation was not conducted; protest sustained.
ACS Government Services, Inc., B-293014, 2004 CPD ¶ 18: Represented protestor, a United States Army systems support contractor, in challenging award of systems implementation and training procurement for Army logistics system on basis of material misrepresentations in awardee’s proposal. Protest sustained; in virtually unprecedented result, GAO directed award to protestor.
Smiths Detection, Inc., B-298838 et seq., 2007 CPD ¶ 5: Represented intervenor/awardee, a DHS R&D contractor, in successful defense of complex protest involving contract awards for substantial R&D/T&E, pilot deployment, production and operational deployment of the CAARS program, a critical homeland security program to detect nuclear threats at maritime ports and other facilities; protest included allegations of improper cost/technical evaluations, improper cost/technical tradeoff, and lack of meaningful discussions; protest denied.
Successfully represented one of the two domestic providers of medium and heavy space launch services in a series of protests at the agency level, GAO and the Court of Federal Claims.
Protest relating to the Air Force’s multi-billion dollar Evolved Expendable Launch Vehicle program.
Represented a developer and manufacturer of Airport Surface Detection Equipment in protesting and securing a highly favorable settlement of a proposed sole-source procurement before the Federal Aviation Administration’s (“FAA”) Office of Dispute Resolution for Acquisition, under which the FAA specifically agreed not only to withdraw and restrict the sole-source procurement proposed but also to use its best efforts to provide our client with new contracting opportunities relating to the technology at issue.
Successfully represented one of the largest base maintenance and service contractors in protesting the Department of the Army’s decision to retain project services and logistics functions in-house under OMB Circular A-76; following successful pursuit of both the cost appeal to the agency and the GAO protest, the Army awarded the contract to the client; we then successfully defended a protest filed by a disappointed private offeror.
Handled (with appropriate security clearances) several protests involving classified projects.