As the head of Cordatis’s litigation practice, Josh Schnell represents government contractors, grant recipients, businesses, and individuals in federal, state, and administrative courts throughout the country. These cases involve breach of contract claims, government investigations, terminations, sub-prime disputes, bid protests, the Administrative Procedure Act, government IP rights, and employment matters.
Since January 2025, Josh has been representing federal employees before the Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB), agency grievance tribunals, and Offices of Inspector General. This practice builds on Josh’s prior experience at the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ), where he litigated MSPB appeals and other federal employment matters. Josh’s current cases involve challenges to reductions-in-force (aka RIFs) and other unlawful actions being used to fire federal employees. For example, he represents a group of U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) Foreign Service Officers who are challenging their RIFs and other personnel actions at the MSPB and the Foreign Service Grievance Board.
Josh also represents farmers, ranchers, outdoor outfitters, and the non-profits who support them in contract and grant litigation related to public lands and natural resources. For example, Josh litigates cases related to Forest Service stewardship contracts, National Park Service permits, and the sustainable agriculture and conservation programs that USDA administers under the Farm Bill and other authorities.
In addition to litigation, Josh has an active ethics and compliance practice. This practice includes helping clients develop and strengthen their governance programs and conducting internal investigations. Josh also defends clients in False Claims Act cases, suspension and debarment proceedings, audits, and other enforcement matters. For example, Josh has successfully defended clients against investigations by the Department of Justice, several Offices of Inspector General, and the Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs (OFCCP).
Finally, Josh spends a significant amount of his time counseling clients on avoiding litigation, audits, and government investigations.
When not practicing law, Josh enjoys spending time with his wife and three kids, coaching lacrosse and basketball, and chasing brook trout in the Blue Ridge Mountains.
Recent Representative Cases:
- J. Doe 1-5 v. United States, No. 24-947 (Fed. Cl.) – class action challenging USAID’s termination of the Payne Fellowship Program.
- YPR Festek, LLC v. Magnum Real Estate, LP, No. 25-391 (EDVA) – commercial real estate dispute.
- Alpine Consulting Partners, LLC v. Jacokes et al., No. 25-193 (DDC) – employment dispute.
- KeyLogic Associates, Inc. v. Blackwatch International Corp., No. 25-4845 (Fairfax County Circuit Court) – sub-prime dispute related to U.S. Patent and Trade Office contracts.
- Vitale v. Tenica Global Solutions et al., No. 24-1339 (DDC) – employment discrimination dispute.
- Doe v. Encompass. LLC, No XXX (EEOC) – employment discrimination dispute.
- Centerra Security Services GMBH v. United States, No. 24-1879 (Fed. Cl.) – bid protest challenging billion-dollar Army contract for base-security services throughout Germany.
- Insight Systems Corp. v. Communications Resources, Inc., No. 24-1859 (Fairfax County Circuit Court) – joint-venture dispute related to USDA contracts.
- 22nd Century Technologies, Inc. v. Red River, LLC , No. 24-1478 (Fairfax County Circuit Court) – sub-prime dispute related to IRS contract.
- In re 22nd Century Software Solutions, LLC et al. v. Singh et al., No. 24-1269 (Fairfax County Circuit Court) – employment and LLC membership dispute.
- PMCG CollaborateUP JV, LLC v. United States, No. 24-79 (Fed. Cl.) – bid protest related to USAID procurement.
- HamHed, LLC v. Dep’t of Veterans Affairs, No. 8082 (CBCA) – contract claims against VA.
- ArmorSource, LLC. v. Army, No. 63836 (ASBCA) – contract claims against the Army.
- AM K-9 Detection Services, LLC v. United States, No. 23-210 (Fed. Cl.) – bid protest challenging USPS contract for canine bomb detection services on commercial airlines.
- Academi Training Center, LLC v. State Department, No. 7515 (CBCA) – contract claims against the State Department.
- Rowe Contracting Services v. U.S. Air Force, No. 63492 et al. (ASBCA) – contract claims against the Air Force.
- Jeffries Mortgage Finance, Inc. et al. v. Clark Realty Capital, LLC, No. 23-49 (DDC) – complex subpoena dispute.
- California Avocados Direct v. USDA, No. 7637 and 8074 (CBCA) – contract claims against USDA
- Thompson et al. v. RCX, LLC et al., No. 21-386 (DDC) – employment dispute.
- Challenger Logistic and Trading LTD. v. United States, No. 23-529 (Fed. Cl.) – contract claims against the Defense Logistics Agency (DLA).
- Automotive Management Services FZ-LLC v. PAE Government Services, Inc., No. 22-193 (EDVA) – sub-prime dispute related to the Afghan Army’s national automotive services contract.
- ArmorSource, LLC v. Army, No. 62895 (ASBCA) – contract claims against the Army.
- Harlan v. Beer, No. 20-23 (E.D. TN) – employment dispute.
- Zafer Taahut, Insat VE Ticaret A.S. v. United States, No. 20-1726 (Fed. Cl.) – bid protest related to large Army Corps and NATO construction contract.
- ArmorSource, LLC v. United States, 20-993 (Fed. Cl.) – bid protest challenging DLA combat helmet procurement.
- Open Technology Fund v. United States, No. 20-1047C (Fed. Cl.) – contract claims against the U.S. Agency for Global Media.
- Harris-Reese et al. v. United States, No. 19-1971 (D. Md.) – Federal Tort Claims Act litigation.
- Hassay v. United States, 19-594 (Fed. Cl.) – military disability retirement case on behalf of disabled Navy veteran.
- Precision Contracting Solutions, LP et al. v. Angi Homeservices, Inc. et al., No. 19-2748 (DDC) – contract dispute.
- Columbus Regional Hospital v. United States, No. 18-1299 (Fed. Cl.) – grant claims against FEMA.
- Columbus Regional Hospital v. FEMA, 18-2028, (DDC) – FOIA litigation.
- Gerber Legendary Blades v. U.S. AbilityOne Commission, 19-936 (EDVA) – FOIA litigation.
- American Relocation Directions, LLC v. United States, No. 20-1717 (Fed. Cl.) bid protest related to DHS contract for global moving services.
- SAIC v. United States et al., No. 17-1825 (Fed. Cl.) – patent infringement litigation against the Army.