Bid Protests

Blank Rome’s government contracts attorneys have for decades maintained one of the leading bid protest practices, representing both protestors and intervenors in bid protest matters in federal procurements, as well as at the state and local level. We have a particular understanding of protests at the U.S. Government Accountability Office (“GAO”), the U.S. Court of Federal Claims (“COFC”), and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit.

Our Practice

With our experience, breadth, and depth of practice, we bring the right team and strategy to efficiently handle protests of all sizes, ranging from smaller civilian acquisitions to once-in-a-generation defense hardware procurements. Our practice is active in the ABA’s Section of Public Contract Law Bid Protest Committee, and closely follows—and contributes to—developments in the field. We are also keenly sensitive to our clients’ business objectives in prosecuting and defending protests, and our many years of in-depth knowledge allow us to advise our clients so they can make informed business decisions in contested procurements.

Our Successes

• Successfully defended the award of a $6.7 billion production contract to a major defense manufacturer in the Army’s Joint Light Tactical Vehicle Program, the largest tactical wheeled vehicle procurement in Army history. Our win followed extensive proceedings before both the GAO and COFC, and involved a 300,000 page administrative record. Lockheed Martin Corporation, B-412056, B-412056.2, Dec. 15, 2015; Lockheed Martin Corp. v. United States, No. 15-1536C, Feb. 19, 2016 (Lettow, J.).
• Helped secure a contract award for a leading specialized engineering, scientific, and technical services company following a successful protest on a $1.7 billion, 10-year NASA program. The decision set key new precedent regarding the impact of corporate transactions during a procurement on evaluation and award decisions. Wyle Laboratories, Inc., B-408112.2, Dec. 27, 2013; National Aeronautics and Space Administration-Reconsideration, B-408112.3, May 14, 2014.
• Successfully protested award decision in Air Force’s $960 million Network Centric Solutions-2 procurement (“NETCENTS-2”), securing sustained grounds on cost realism, technical, past performance, and trade-off challenges. Computer Sciences Corporation; HP Enterprise Services, LLC; Harris IT Services Corporation; Booz Allen Hamilton, Inc., B-408694.7; B-408694.8; B-408694.9; B-408694.10; B-408694.11, Nov. 3, 2014.
• Successfully defended award of one billion dollar Department of Defense award to provide and operate helicopters for the U.S. armed forces in Afghanistan, following protests at both GAO and the COFC. AAR Airlift Group, Inc., B-414690; B-414690.2; B-414690.3, Aug. 22, 2017; AAR Airlift Group, Inc. v. United States, No. 17-1151, Sept. 22, 2017 (Braden, J.).
• Secured corrective action against a contractor’s exclusion from the competitive range in a Drug Enforcement Administration linguistics services procurement. The corrective action led to the contractor’s reinstatement in the competitive range and ultimately winning the contract. AllWorld Language Consultants, Inc., B-403912, October 14, 2010. When the contractor’s competitors subsequently protested that award, we successfully defended the award decision—all protests were denied. MVM, Inc., B-403912.3, May 26, 2011; Metropolitan Interpreters and Translators, Inc., B-403912.4, .5, .6 and .9, May 31, 2011.
• Secured corrective action resulting in contract award in $5.6 billion Defense Intelligence Agency’s Solutions for Intelligence Analysis II procurement (the only one of four protestors to secure this relief). SRA International, Inc., B-405942.5; B-405942.9, Oct. 1, 2012. 
• Successfully protested size status of putative awardee in $320 million IRS procurement for web portal services, leading to award of procurement to our client. Successfully defended that award in decision before GAO. eTouch Federal Systems, LLC, B-404894.3, Aug. 15, 2011.