Editing L3 Technologies (section)

==Controversies==

===Federal contract suspension===
In 2010, it was announced that L3's Special Support Programs Division had been suspended by the [[United States Air Force]] from doing any contract work for the US federal government. A US Department of Defense investigation had reportedly found that the company had, "used a highly sensitive government computer network to collect competitive business information for its own use." A US federal criminal investigation<ref>Hodge, Nathan, "Spotlight On Private Firms At Pentagon", ''[[Wall Street Journal]]'', June 12, 2010, p. 4.</ref> ended the temporary suspension on July 27, 2010.

===Counterfeit parts===
On November 4, 2010, L3 issued a part purge notification to prevent future use of Chinese counterfeit parts, but did not notify its customers whose display systems suffered from much higher than expected failure rates.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Did-IAFs-US-made-C-130J-Super-Hercules-that-crashed-have-fake-Chinese-parts/articleshow/32977838.cms |title=Did IAF's 'US-made' C-130J Super Hercules that crashed have fake Chinese parts? |last1=Rajghatta |first1=Chidanand |date=March 30, 2014 |website=indiatimes.com |publisher=TNN |access-date=March 30, 2014 |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140330202550/http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Did-IAFs-US-made-C-130J-Super-Hercules-that-crashed-have-fake-Chinese-parts/articleshow/32977838.cms |archive-date=March 30, 2014 |df=mdy-all }}</ref>

===EOTech defective holographic sights lawsuit===
In 2015, L3 Technologies agreed to pay $25.6 million to settle a lawsuit with the U.S. Government. L3 was accused of knowingly providing the U.S. military with optics that failed in extreme temperatures and humid weather conditions. These sights were provided to infantry and special operations forces operating in Afghanistan and Iraq, as well as civilians and law enforcement.<ref name=eotech2016>[http://www.military.com/daily-news/2016/01/21/eotech-breaks-silence-over-defective-sights.html "EOTech Breaks Silence over Defective Sights"] {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160727044941/http://www.military.com/daily-news/2016/01/21/eotech-breaks-silence-over-defective-sights.html |date=July 27, 2016 }}, ''[[Military.com]]'', January 21, 2016. Retrieved on November 8, 2016.</ref>

The civil fraud lawsuit was filed by [[Preet Bharara]], in the Southern District of New York. The lawsuit alleged L3 officials have known since 2006 that the holographic sights being sent to Iraq and Afghanistan failed to perform as advertised in extreme temperature ranges. The lawsuit alleges that the FBI independently discovered the thermal drift defect, where the point-of-aim would shift when the sights were exposed to temperature extremes,<ref name=eotech2016 /> in March 2015 and presented EOTech with "the very same findings that the company had documented internally for years. Shortly thereafter, EOTech finally disclosed the thermal drift defect to the DoD." According to court documents, EOTech had advertised that its sights performed in temperatures ranging from -40 degrees to 140 degrees Fahrenheit, and in humid conditions.<ref>[http://www.military.com/daily-news/2015/12/02/us-optic-maker-settles-lawsuit-over-defective-rifle-sights.html "US Optic Maker Settles Lawsuit Over Defective Rifle Sights"] {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170217220347/http://www.military.com/daily-news/2015/12/02/us-optic-maker-settles-lawsuit-over-defective-rifle-sights.html |date=February 17, 2017 }}, ''[[Military.com]]'', December 2, 2015. Retrieved on * November 2015.</ref>