EOD Technology, Inc. v. United States
82 Fed. Cl. 12 | United States Court of Federal Claims | 2008
What This Case Means for Subcontractors
EOD Technology protested a contract award to American K-9 for canine services in Afghanistan. When the protest was filed, a GAO stay automatically halted contract performance. The Army overrode that stay without proper justification. The court ruled the override was illegal because the Army failed to show urgent circumstances or consider whether other companies could do the work. This decision protects subcontractors' right to have their protests heard before work begins.
Key Takeaways
- •When you file a GAO protest, work must stop automatically. An agency cannot override this stay just because it wants to—they must prove urgent national security or compelling reasons exist.
- •The agency must actually analyze whether competitors can do the job. Ignoring alternatives and rubber-stamping an override will get thrown out in court.
- •Document everything about your bid and the award process. If the agency terminates your contract for convenience after you win, then awards it to someone else, you have grounds to challenge the override of any protest stay.
The override determination may not be based simply on the agency's preference to override the stay.
Frequently Asked Question
Can a government agency ignore a GAO protest stay and keep working with another contractor?
No. When you file a timely GAO protest, work automatically stops. The agency can only override this stay if it documents urgent and compelling circumstances—not just because it prefers to move forward. The agency must also show it considered whether other companies could do the work. Simply wanting to proceed is not enough.
Related Cases
General Services Commission v. Little-Tex Insulation Co.
The State does not waive sovereign immunity from breach-of-contract suits by accepting contract benefits; Chapter 2260's administrative procedure is the exclusive remedy for such claims.
PYCA Industries, Inc. v. Harrison County Waste Water Management District
A wastewater district is a citizen for diversity jurisdiction purposes and a political subdivision entitled to sovereign immunity from tort claims under pre-Pruett Mississippi law.
MCI CONSTRUCTORS, LLC v. City of Greensboro
District court properly confirmed arbitration award finding City entitled to $14.9 million damages; arbitration panel did not exceed its powers and award was not procured by undue means.
Linan-Faye Construction Co., Inc. v. Housing Authority of the City of Camden
District court erred in applying federal common law instead of New Jersey law to interpret the termination for convenience clause, but New Jersey courts would look to federal common law for guidance on this issue.
Blackstone Medical, Inc. D/B/A Orthofix Spinal Implants v. Phoenix Surgicals, LLC
Trial court properly denied motions for directed verdict and judgment notwithstanding the verdict on breach of contract and promissory estoppel claims where evidence supported jury findings of wrongful termination and waiver of exclusivity provision.
Textron Defense Systems v. Sheila E. Widnall, Secretary of the Air Force
A contractor under a cost-plus-award-fee contract is not entitled to a pro-rata share of unearned award fees upon termination for convenience, as the award fee clause was expressly exempted from the termination clause and the contractor had no reasonable expectation of receiving fees for unperformed work.