Double Check Your SAM Registration Accuracy!
Denver Attorney Richard F. Busch II Filed Original Status Protests Exposing $500 Million of Allegedly Inappropriate Government Contracts Awarded By the IRS To Questionable SDVOSB Business. Alleged Perpetrator of Fraud Eventually Tried for Murder.
When competing for government contracts small business clients are often confused about the difference between "discussions" and "clarifications."
HR 3945-Another Attempt to Revamp the SDVOSB Verification Process
On November 5, 2015, Representative Mike Coffman, along with five co-sponsors introduced HR 3945, titled Improving Opportunities for Service-Disabled Veteran-Owned Small Businesses Act of 2015. While the text of the bill was not available at the time of this writing, Ben Stein, Coffman’s chief of staff, sent over a brief description of the components of the bill. That document can be downloaded here. Importantly, Representative Coffman, who served in both the United States Army and Marine Corps as both enlisted and an officer, has submitted similar bills for passing in previous sessions of Congress.
Trade secret laws protect the proprietary information that make your business unique and valuable. They fall under the broad spectrum of intellectual property law but carry some distinct advantages. Trade secret laws allow you to keep your important information secret as long as you take reasonable measures to keep it from entering the public stream.
The U.S. Supreme Court (SCOTUS) was scheduled to hear oral arguments on September 9 in a case involving whether the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) must prioritize service-disabled veteran-owned small businesses (“SDVOSBs”) when it buys supplies and services. The case has been withdrawn from the calendar and both sides are required to prepare briefs filed regarding whether the case is now "moot" as the source of the underlying controversy has ended because the disputed contracts in the case “have been fully performed….” If the case is moot it will be dismissed.
Unanimous Consent Language and Other Requirements
In the past two years, several applicants for inclusion in the VIP database have received denial letters from the CVE, because of wording in their operating agreements. The most common reason for denial is language requiring unanimous consent to amend the agreement itself or to add members to the LLC. The VA’s OSDBU posts its official position on operating agreements here.
However, the LLC Acts of 23 States and the Uniform LLC Act require that Operating Agreements be amended only with the unanimous consent of the members. A similar number of States require unanimous consent of the members to add or disassociated members after the filing of origination documents. Download the survey here:
This unanimous consent requirement by the States makes sense when you consider that Operating Agreements are corporate governance documents, but also serve as a contractual agreement between the members. If a member is added or removed, the equity interests of at least some of the other members necessarily changes. Also, the voting paradigm shifts for any proposed changes to the firm.
Who's in Charge of the Beer?
Great American Beer Festival season is upon us and our turns our thoughts to beer. In recent years, discussions of brewing law have often revolved around trademark disputes, which have become increasingly contentious and numerous. But trademark disputes are like the early arrival of pumpkin beers: we need a break from all that. Instead, we are going to look at the decidedly less sexy—but equally important--topic of the TTB.
Topics: Trademark Law
Will your lack of facility clearance effect your ability to win a bid?
The GAO has reaffirmed that the possession of a secret facility clearance by a government contractor may be a pre-condition to submitting a bid.
Topics: Government Procurement
Should Veterans Adjust to Us or Us to Them?
“In the military, we give medals to people who sacrifice themselves, so that others may survive. In corporations, we give bonuses to people who sacrifice others, so that they may benefit.” Simon Sinek, author of Leaders Eat Last, Why Some Teams Pull Together and Others Don’t
It's not hard to find someone nowadays advancing the idea that hiring veterans is a good idea. After all, the saying goes, look at all the great traits the military teaches its service members:
- “Courage under fire,” which translates to “works well under pressure.”
- “Teamwork,” which translates to, “works well with others.”
- “Initiative,” which translates to, “Self-starter.”
- “Selfless service,” which translates roughly to “they’ll work hard and ask for little in return.”
- And “Discipline,” which translates to “they’ll show up to work on time and do what they’re told.”
What few CEOs or HR managers consider, is that they may commit to the feel-good measure of hiring Veterans and then realize few of the benefits they anticipated when making the hire. Unfortunately, what usually follows is someone becoming the Veteran’s apologist. Stakeholders expecting the Veteran to shine and finding themselves disappointed quickly run through the list of “usual suspect” excuses.
1) The Veteran is having a hard time adjusting to civilian life;
2) The military just didn’t train the Veteran for anything useful for the civilian market place;”
3) The Veteran must be suffering from PTSD or some other variety of “the military broke the Veteran.”
What almost none of them do is think to themselves or say out loud, “boy, we must have really fallen short of this Veteran’s expectations.” Unfortunately, even fewer would be willing to change their corporate culture if they did stop to ask the question and found themselves answering in the affirmative.