August 2018 Bid Protest Roundup

This month, we bring you three bid protests from three fora.  The first is not a decision at all, but an interesting dissenting opinion from two judges of the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, calling into question that court's recent narrowing of the Court of Federal Claims' (COFC) jurisdiction over certain kinds of bid protests.  The second is a COFC decision adopting the Government Accountability Office's (GAO) approach to addressing key personnel who become unavailable after proposal submission.  The final decision is from the GAO, sustaining a protest because of ambiguities as to the identity of an offeror.

Cleveland Assets, LLC v. United States (Fed. Cir. 2018):  In the latest chapter of the Cleveland Assets bid protest, the Federal Circuit denied a petition for an en banc rehearing of its previous decision denying the protester's appeal.  Much more interesting than the one-paragraph denial is the nine-page dissent that followed.