Additional Representative Bid Protest Experience
- represented a client awarded a contract by the Internal Revenue Service to provide tax collection services under a controversial privatization program. Competitors of our client protested the award to the GAO, contesting the rationality of the IRS’s evaluation of the proposals and also contending that our client should have been disqualified because of widely reported problems, including a criminal conviction of one of its principals, in performing prior collection contracts for public entities. We intervened in the protest proceedings on our client’s behalf and submitted extensive written arguments refuting the protestor’s contentions and assisted the IRS in its defense of its procurement decision. The GAO denied the protest and our client proceeded to perform the contract.
- represented a U.S. Postal Service contractor in several bid protests involving contracts for the air transport of mail. The USPS had eliminated our client from the competitive range on the basis that our client had settled a civil False Claims Act action bought by the Government. We alleged a de facto suspension or debarment and were successful in obtaining a hearing before the USPS concerning the merits of the alleged FCA action. We ultimately persuaded the USPS to terminate the contract awarded to the competitor and to award the contract to our client.
- represented a manufacturer of ballistic shields in multiple successful GAO protests of U.S. Army contract awards to a competitor. In each case, the solicitation was a “brand name or equal” procurement that specified our client’s product and sought a product with the same salient characteristics, and the Army awarded the contracts to a competitor. Our client believed that the competitor’s product was unequal to its product in several material respects, and we prepared and filed protests to the GAO on that basis. In each case, the Army withdrew the contract award in the face of our protest and took corrective action.
- filed a GAO protest for a contractor challenging the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' award of a military construction contract in Qatar to a joint venture consisting of a Turkish firm and a U.S. firm. Our client, a U.S. firm, was entitled by statute to a 20% price preference over foreign firms when competing for military construction contracts in Arabian Gulf countries, including Qatar. The Corps gave the Turkish-U.S. joint venture the same price preference. Had it not done so, our client would have been the low bidder. We argued to the GAO that the awardee joint venture was not a U.S. firm as defined in the applicable regulation. In response to our protest, the Corps capitulated and agreed to rescind the contract award, reevaluate the proposals and award a new contract.
- represented two security contractors in a bid protest to the GAO. Our clients had formed a joint venture to pursue a contract to provide security at the United States Embassy in Athens. When the State Department rejected their proposal in favor of the incumbent contractor’s proposal, our clients retained us to prepare a protest. Although the State Department vigorously defended its decision to award the contract to the incumbent, we persuaded the GAO that the government's decision was irrational and violated the terms of the solicitation. The GAO sustained the protest, overturned the State Department’s decision, and awarded attorney fees and costs to our clients.
- served as long-time advisor to client that was one of three companies competing for the production contract to supply the U.S. Army with a newly designed military vehicle. The contract was estimated at more than $6.5 billion, with total program costs expected to exceed $25 billion. Well before the highly-complex contract was awarded, we were retained to prepare for a potential bid protest. Over the course of many months, our lawyers studied the Request for Proposals to understand the Army’s complicated evaluation scheme and identify issues that could result in a protest. We also assisted the client in raising pre-proposal issues with the Army. After award was made to another competitor, we participated in an intense period of analysis and assessment of the potential protest grounds, which included close coordination with the client’s program personnel regarding technological and pricing issues. On our advice, our client ultimately decided not to protest. Another competitor protested and was unsuccessful.
- represented a major worldwide consulting firm as an intervenor in a bid protest brought by a competitor challenging our client’s award of a contract by the United States Agency for International Development to implement a program in eleven Asian countries to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by increasing investment in clean energy projects.
- filed a protest on behalf of a major health company to challenge its elimination from the competitive range for a contract to support of the Military OneSource program, which provides information and counseling services for U.S. military service members and their families. Our client submitted a proposal as the prime contractor on behalf of an 11-company alliance. After the agency notified our client that it was being excluded from the competitive range in this procurement, we prepared and filed a protest contending that the evaluation of our client’s Proposal was unreasonable, irrational, and not in accordance with the RFP. Ultimately, our client decided to withdraw the protest.
- represented a manufacturer that was awarded a supply contract by the National Guard Bureau. A competitor protested and we intervened to defend the award. Ultimately, the National Guard Bureau chose to take corrective action and the protest was dismissed.
- filed a protest of a contract award to provide security services to the U.S. military in Iraq on behalf of an incumbent that was eliminated from the competition for the follow on contract. In response to our protest, the government withdrew its decision, reinstated our client in the competition and amended the terms of the solicitation. The government then awarded to another contractor, which we also protested. The GAO eventually denied the protest, after multiple rounds of briefings.