  Sequential allocation is a simple allocation mechanism in which agents are
given pre-specified turns and each agents gets the most preferred item that is
still available. It has long been known that sequential allocation is not
strategyproof.
  Bouveret and Lang (2014) presented a polynomial-time algorithm to compute a
best response of an agent with respect to additively separable utilities and
claimed that (1) their algorithm correctly finds a best response, and (2) each
best response results in the same allocation for the manipulator. We show that
both claims are false via an example. We then show that in fact the problem of
computing a best response is NP-complete. On the other hand, the insights and
results of Bouveret and Lang (2014) for the case of two agents still hold.
