For purposes of this subsection, "money or other thing of value" shall not include payments made for sales demonstration equipment and materials furnished on a nonprofit basis for use in making sales and not for resale.Unfair methods of competition and unfair or deceptive acts or practices, including but not limited to the use or employment of any deception fraud, false pretense, false promise, misrepresentation or the concealment, suppression or omission of any material fact, with intent that others rely upon the concealment, suppression or omission of such material fact, or the use or employment of any practice described in Section 2 of the "Uniform Deceptive Trade Practices Act", approved August 5, 1965, in the conduct of any trade or commerce are hereby declared unlawful whether any person has in fact been misled, deceived or damaged thereby.Coalition will fully handle your SEO campaign including making technical adjustments in site code, writing copy, building links, getting press coverage, and ultimately dramatically increasing your profitability.
Because the statute database is maintained primarily for legislative drafting purposes, statutory changes are sometimes included in the statute database before they take effect.If the source note at the end of a Section of the statutes includes a Public Act that has not yet taken effect, the version of the law that is currently in effect may have already been removed from the database and you should refer to that Public Act to see the changes made to the current law.(a) The term "advertisement" includes the attempt by publication, dissemination, solicitation or circulation to induce directly or indirectly any person to enter into any obligation or acquire any title or interest in any merchandise and includes every work device to disguise any form of business solicitation by using such terms as "renewal", "invoice", "bill", "statement", or "reminder", to create an impression of existing obligation when there is none, or other language to mislead any person in relation to any sought after commercial transaction.(c) The term "person" includes any natural person or his legal representative, partnership, corporation (domestic and foreign), company, trust, business entity or association, and any agent, employee, salesman, partner, officer, director, member, stockholder, associate, trustee or cestui que trust thereof.(e) The term "consumer" means any person who purchases or contracts for the purchase of merchandise not for resale in the ordinary course of his trade or business but for his use or that of a member of his household.(f) The terms "trade" and "commerce" mean the advertising, offering for sale, sale, or distribution of any services and any property, tangible or intangible, real, personal or mixed, and any other article, commodity, or thing of value wherever situated, and shall include any trade or commerce directly or indirectly affecting the people of this State.(g) The term "pyramid sales scheme" includes any plan or operation whereby a person in exchange for money or other thing of value acquires the opportunity to receive a benefit or thing of value, which is primarily based upon the inducement of additional persons, by himself or others, regardless of number, to participate in the same plan or operation and is not primarily contingent on the volume or quantity of goods, services, or other property sold or distributed or to be sold or distributed to persons for purposes of resale to consumers.Your website is the 24/7/365 face of your business and it is essential that it showcases your business in the best possible way.Contracting officers are required to identify and evaluate potential OCIs as early in the acquisition process as possible, and avoid, neutralize, or mitigate significant potential conflicts of interest before contract award. The responsibility for determining whether an actual or apparent conflict of interest will arise, and to what extent the firm should be excluded from the competition, rests with the contracting officer. BAE argues that the COs acknowledgement of the appearance of a conflict of interest should have been the end of the inquiry, and that the award to Leidos should have been found tainted as a result the advisors ownership of Leidos stock. See FAR 3.101-1; FAR 3.1103(a)(3)(iii); Celeris Sys., Inc., B-404651, Mar. Our Office has recognized that the appearance of a conflict of interest is sufficient to warrant action to address that conflict, such as exclusion of an offeror from a competition, even where no actual impropriety can be shown, provided that the agencys determination is based on fact, and not mere innuendo and suspicion. Rather, as discussed herein, the CO further examined the record and concluded that the advisors role did not give rise to a disqualifying conflict. As an initial matter, we address the agencys contention that the protesters OCI challenge is untimely. The agency contends that the protesters OCI argument is untimely, as it was not raised within 10 days of DRSs receipt of the OCI report, which the agency alleges provided the operative facts underlying the protesters OCI contention. The agency further argues that the protesters OCI argument, contained in a footnote in its July 30 protest, did not provide a sufficient legal and factual basis for protest, and that DRSs subsequent, more detailed OCI argument represents an untimely, piecemeal presentation of its argument. Based on our review of the record, we find that the protesters OCI argument was timely raised. Since these documents were first provided to the protester as part of the agency report, we find DRSs OCI argument timely. Thus, we have no basis to question the agencys conclusion that the testing work contained in section 3.1.2 of the PWS would not create a significant OCI for LMIS.We innovate constantly, operate transparently, and build lasting results.
The team at Coalition will work to build a long-term partnership with you.Recent laws may not yet be included in the ILCS database, but they are found on this site as Public Acts soon after they become law.For information concerning the relationship between statutes and Public Acts, refer to the Guide.Innovative Test Asset Solutions, LLC, B-411687, B-411687.2, October 2, 2015, 2016 CPD 68 at 17. In this regard, the identification of conflicts of interest is a fact-specific inquiry that requires the exercise of considerable discretion. A protester must identify hard facts that indicate the existence or potential existence of a conflict; mere inference or suspicion of an actual or potential conflict is not enough. Here, the agency reasonably assessed the potential for OCIs, and the protesters arguments largely fail due to a lack of hard facts. In this regard, our Office has reviewed protests concerning conflicts of interest to determine whether an agencys efforts or other factors mitigated the appearance of a conflict of interest under the provisions of FAR subpart 3.1. As discussed above, on July 30, DRS filed a protest with this Office, following DRSs receipt of the Armys OCI report. Following DRSs receipt of the agency report, which included the PWS for task order 57 and the declarations of several agency personnel prepared as part of the Armys OCI investigation, the protester withdrew its argument that the RTEP did not reflect the agencys requirements, and further expanded upon its OCI argument. In this regard, the record reflects that DRSs OCI argument, filed as comments within 10 days of its receipt of the agency report, is premised on information contained in the PWS for task order 57 and the declarations of agency personnel supporting the OCI report. As to the other engineering work required under sections 3.1.1 and 3.1.3 of the PWS, however, we conclude that the Army did not adequately consider whether these tasks would result in an impaired objectivity OCI for LMIS. Indeed, consistent with the PWS, both DRS and LMIS proposed to review and audit software documentation deliverables provided by other contractors.We review the reasonableness of a contracting officers OCI investigation and, where an agency has given meaningful consideration to whether a significant conflict of interest exists, we will not substitute our judgment for the agencys, absent clear evidence that the agencys conclusion is unreasonable. Biased Ground Rules A biased ground rules OCI exists where a firm, as part of its performance of a government contract, has in some sense set the ground rules for another government contract by, for example, writing the statement of work or the specifications: the primary concern is that the firm could skew the competition, whether intentionally or not, in favor of itself. E.g., The Jones/Hill Joint Venture, B-286194.4 et al., Dec. In that protest, DRS alleged that based on the findings of the OCI report, the PWS for the FOFH task order overstated the agencys actual requirements and thus prevented a fair competition. In the alternative, to the extent the Army argued that the solicitation accurately reflected the agencys requirements, DRS contended that LMIS would have an impaired objectivity OCI as it would be responsible under the FOFH task order for evaluating the deliverables it produces under task order 57. For example, the agencys OCI report makes no mention of the PWS requirement that the awardee review and report issues with system developer deliverables, which DRS alleges would require LMIS to review the documentation deliverables it provides under task order 57. AR, Tab 27, DRS Technical Proposal, at 10; AR, Tab 31, LMIS Technical Proposal, at 12, 16.I would like to extend my thanks to yourself, Rogin Lee and Mr. Also send your Beijing China travel blogs to us and have your blog posted for others to share.