Andy Howard is a partner in the firm’s Construction & Government Contracts litigation group. He specializes in federal, state and local government contracting issues and disputes, and represents clients across a wide range of industries, including construction, healthcare, aerospace, energy and technology. Andy regularly advises companies on the unique procurement and contracting policies and procedures contained in the Federal Acquisition Regulation and equivalent state procurement rules, on compliance with and in negotiation of government contracts, subcontracts, joint venture, teaming and SBA-approved mentor-protégé agreements, and on the standards for the protection of classified information under the National Industrial Security Program Operating Manual (NISPOM). He also assists government contractors in understanding the unique trade secret protection rules contained in the FAR and in preparing or objecting to requests for public records under the federal Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) and similar state laws. As an advocate, Andy represents companies in pre- and post-award bid protests and in various other types of litigation proceedings involving government agencies at the local, state and federal levels, including claims prosecution proceedings. Andy also has particular experience representing large general contractors in complex commercial and public works construction disputes involving claims for extra work, delay and other time-impact claims.
- Outside government contracts counsel to an ENR Top 30 general contractor for federal construction contracts compliance and claims mitigation issues.
- Outside government contracts counsel to a NASDAQ company.
- Counsel to four technology companies who were sued under the civil False Claim Act and were dismissed with prejudice on successful pre-answer motions.
- Government contracts counsel to a Fortune 1000 company for preventing disclosure of privileged commercial information in response to a third-party FOIA request.
- Counsel to an ENR Top 10 contractor in the prosecution of its multimillion-dollar claim against the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, which settled in exchange for a substantial payment to the client and reversal of an unsatisfactory past performance evaluation.
- Government contracts counsel to an information technology equipment manufacturer for advice and compliance with domestic source restrictions in federal construction and supply contracts.
- Counsel to a defense contractor for bid protest and trade secret protection issues.
- Government contracts counsel to a defense testing company for the divestiture and commercial sale of a low-level nuclear radiography machine.
- Government contracts counsel to a national energy company for the negotiation of gas supply contracts.
- Government contracts counsel to a leading national health care services company, assisting in the preservation of trade secret and proprietary information, administrative protests and appeals in connection with various states’ managed health care programs.
- Government contracts counsel to a regional hospital authority in facility reconstruction funded partly by Public Assistance grants administered by the Federal Emergency Management Agency under the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Assistance and Emergency Relief Act.
Trends features updates on key litigation issues and highlights Alston & Bird's broad and diverse litigation practices. In this edition, we are pleased to share with you examples of our recent courtroom victories.
July 4, 2014
On March 11, 2014, the California Court of Appeal (1st District) issued its opinion in San Francisco Unified Sch. Dist. ex rel. Contreras v. First Student, Inc. There, the court denied the defendant contractor’s motion for summary judgment in a qui tam case brought under the California False Claims Act on grounds that an issue of fact existed as to whether the defendant contractor’s implied certification of compliance with the commercial terms of its agreement with the San Francisco School District was material to the District’s decision to pay the contractor’s invoices. This decision has the potential of inviting more qui tam cases based on nothing more than a contractor’s noncompliance with the terms of its contract with a public agency.
March 25, 2014
August 13, 2013
“Past Performance Evaluations: New Rules, Same Challenges,” Law360, March 13, 2012.
March 13, 2012
- American Bar Association, Public Contract Law Section
- American Bar Association, Forum on the Construction Industry
- Associated General Contractors of America, SoCal Chapter
- National Contract Management Association, South Bay Chapter
- Recognized as a Southern California Rising Star in the areas of Government Contracts and Construction by Super Lawyers Magazine in 2012, 2013 and 2014