Our lawyers have handled dozens of protests. We have defended and challenged contract awards and solicitations before agencies, at the Government Accountability Office (GAO) and in the United States Court of Federal Claims. The cases we have pursued are as varied as the procurements the government conducts. They include a wide range of procurements for defense and civilian agencies, supply and services contracts and health care contracts.
- represented a guaranty agency in a successful GAO protest challenging the Department of Education’s (ED) award decisions of student loan collection contracts worth hundreds of millions of dollars. Our client competed for an ED contract worth $417.1 million ceiling value to provide student loan debt collection services. After our client did not receive one of the seven contracts awarded by ED, we prepared and submitted a GAO protest challenging the award decisions based on an improper evaluation of our client’s proposal. In a decision addressing our client’s protest as well as over 40 other protests of the same award decision, GAO denied most of the protests but sustained our client’s protest and recommended that ED take corrective action including a reevaluation of our client’s proposal.
- filed a GAO protest against the State Department for a service-disabled veteran-owned small business and a joint venture of two companies. One of the joint venturers was the incumbent contractor at the State Department for the work at issue, which was to provide staff for a variety of State Department needs, from building receptionists to research historians. The contract was expiring and the State Department awarded the follow-on contract to another small business whose bid price was substantially lower than our client’s. Our protest argued that the agency could not have conducted an adequate price analysis and, in fact, the awardee could not adequately perform the contract at the price it proposed. The agency capitulated in the face or our protest, agreeing to rescind the contract award and reevaluate the proposals.
- represented a quasi-state entity as an intervenor in a protest brought in the United States Court of Federal Claims challenging the Department of Homeland Security selection of our client to provide the site for the National Bio and Agro Defense Facility, a $650 million state-of-the-art biocontainment facility for the study of foreign animal, emerging and zoonotic diseases that threaten U.S. animals, agriculture and public health. After extensive briefing and court hearings addressing the merits and various procedural issues, the court dismissed the protest.
- represented a client in a series of protests of the Defense Logistics Agency’s (DLA) award of a $330 million contract to provide food distribution services to the U.S. military in Bahrain, Qatar and Saudi Arabia. In an initial protest at the GAO, our client challenged the award of the contract to a competitor on the ground that DLA had improperly evaluated the proposals. After GAO informed DLA that our protest was likely to be sustained, DLA withdrew the award and took corrective action. We filed a second protest challenging DLA’s proposed corrective action. GAO again informed DLA that we were likely to prevail, and DLA again retreated to take corrective action. DLA made a new award decision, which we again protested, and DLA voluntarily withdrew the award to take further corrective action. The client filed a fourth protest when DLA reached the same award decision. After GAO denied the fourth protest, we filed a new protest in the Court of Federal Claims, which sustained DLA’s decision. We prepared and submitted claims to DLA for our client’s attorney fees and costs incurred in pursuing the GAO protests, which were settled favorably.
- represented a commercial item contractor in numerous protests before the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) and GAO when the VA issued unduly restrictive “name brand or equal” solicitations.
- represented a vehicle manufacturer in bid protests challenging the award by the Special Operations Command (“SOCOM”) of a $500 million contract for the supply of the Ground Mobility Vehicle 1.1 contract to our client’s competitor. We represented our client in protests at both the GAO and the United States Court of Federal Claims.
- represented an international construction company in several bid protests regarding overseas construction projects for the State Department. The contracts were in the $80 to $100 million range. In one, the government withdrew the award and recompeted the contract. In another, we intervened and the protestor withdrew the protest. In another, we protested and lost at the GAO. We then filed suit in the United States Court of Federal Claims, which found in our favor, reversing the GAO finding.
Please click here for additional experience.