Author Archives: Steven Koprince

Kingdomware’s Day In Court: Watch My Webinar

Posted on by

Monday was a big day for SDVOSBs and VOSBs, as the Supreme Court heard oral arguments in Kingdomware v. United States.  I was in the courtroom for the oral arguments, and yesterday I gave a webinar on the case.

The webinar explains the factual and legal importance of Kingdomware, discusses my impressions from the oral argument, and answers many great questions posed by audience members.  The webinar is now available on the Koprince Law LLC YouTube channel.  To view it, just follow this link.  And of course, bookmark our YouTube channel for other videos and webinars about important government contracting legal matters.

Kingdomware Gets Its Day In Court: My First Impressions

Posted on by

The Supreme Court heard oral arguments in Kingdomware Technologies Inc., v. United States this morning.  I was in the courtroom as counsel for Kingdomware and the government did their best to answer the questions of eight Justices.

Here are my first impressions.

Continue reading →

SmallGovCon Week In Review: February 15-19, 2016

Posted on by

Next week I will be in Washington, DC to sit in on the Kingdomware Technologies, Inc. v. United States oral arguments. I will be following that up with a blog post on Monday afternoon, a live Twitter Q&A session at 10am EST on Tuesday, February 23 and a free webinar at noon EST (also on Tuesday) detailing what I heard at the hearing.

If you are interested in joining the webinar you can register here and if you want to partake in the Twitter Q&A you can tweet your questions to me @StevenKoprince. On Monday and Tuesday, it’s all about Kingdomware.  In the mean time we bring you our weekly dose of news from around the nation. In this week’s SmallGovCon Week in Review, we take a look at how humans in lieu of technology are leading the charge against procurement fraud, Federal News Radio shines light on the frustrations with GSA, a four-year jail sentence in a kickback scheme, and more.

Continue reading →

Justice Scalia’s Passing & The Kingdomware Case

Posted on by

As the nation pauses to remember Justice Antonin Scalia, SDVOSBs and VOSBs are already asking: what does Justice Scalia’s passing mean for Kingdomware v. United States, which is currently scheduled for oral argument on February 22?

Good question.  Here’s what I know now, plus a little speculation to boot.

Continue reading →

SmallGovCon Week In Review: February 8-12, 2016

Posted on by

Love is in the air this weekend as Valentine’s Day approaches.  And even if that special someone isn’t the chocolate-and-flowers type, nothing says true love like giving the gift of the latest government contracting news and notes.  And best of all, it’s free!

In this week’s edition of SmallGovCon Week In Review, the government appears to have hit its 23% small business goal for the third year running, a contractor will fork over $1 million to settle DOT DBE fraud claims, new data suggests that agencies are cutting back on lowest-price, technically acceptable contracts, and much more.

Continue reading →

SBA Affiliation Rules: 4.16% Minority Owner “Controlled” Company

Posted on by

An owner of a mere 4.16% minority interest nonetheless “controlled” a company within the meaning of the SBA’s affiliation rules because the company’s ownership was split among approximately 20 companies, each with an equal ownership interest.

In a recent size appeal decision, the SBA Office of Hearings and Appeals confirmed that, where a company has no 50% or greater owner, a minority owner may be presumed to control the company–even where that ownership is as little as 4.16%.

Continue reading →

GAO: No Protest Under Omitted FAR Clause

Posted on by

A would-be protester had no valid basis to allege agency wrongdoing when the protester’s allegation was that the awardee would violate a FAR performance of work clause–but the clause was not included in the solicitation.

In a recent decision, the GAO held (unsurprisingly), that a protester could not challenge the awardee’s supposed failure to comply with FAR 52.236-1 because the clause was omitted from the solicitation.

Continue reading →