Stephen P. Ramaley

GAO denied protest of award of large, multiple award IDIQ contract where agency had reasonably eliminated protester as technically unacceptable.

GAO dismissed the protest of the agency’s proposed corrective action where the protester merely anticipated improper action, and because GAO lacks jurisdiction to hear protests of DoD orders valued at less than $25 million.

GAO sustained the protest where the agency had engaged in discussions that were misleading and not meaningful.

GAO denied the protest where the agency had reasonably declined to consider proposal content that exceeded the solicitation’s page limit.

GAO denied the protest where the agency had reasonably determined that the protester’s proposal was technically acceptable, that this determination did not pertain to a matter of responsibility that should have been referred to SBA for a Certificate of Competency.

SBA’s Office of Hearings and Appeals granted the appeal where the Area Office had not adequately examined the issue of whether the awardee was the “manufacturer” of the end items under 13 CFR § 121.406 (b) et seq.

SBA’s Office of Hearings and Appeals granted the appeal where the award was made to a joint venture whose members did not have a current approved SBA Mentor-Protégé relationship.

SBA’s Office of Hearings and Appeals denied the appeal where the underlying protest was properly dismissed.

Members of our Corporate, Securities & Tax Practice Group and our Government Contracts Practice Group recently represented Proteus Technologies Inc. in a sale to Arlington Capital Partners. Proteus Technologies is a software and systems engineering solutions firm supporting the intelligence community, with respect to its cybersecurity and signals intelligence needs.

GAO denied the protest of an almost $100 million contract award where the protester was not prejudiced by the agency waiving a SAM.gov registration requirement, and where the agency had otherwise acted  reasonably and in accordance with the terms of the solicitation.

GAO sustained the protest of a ~$30 million task order award where the awardee had included a material misrepresentation in its proposal.