CFC Has Jurisdiction Over "Nonprocurement" Protests
Client Alert | less than 1 min read | 03.29.10
In Resource Conservation Group, LLC v. United States (Mar. 1, 2010), the Federal Circuit found that the Court of Federal Claims had jurisdiction to adjudicate a protest involving a Navy solicitation to lease its own real property to another party. GAO and CFC had each dismissed the protest, but the Federal Circuit held that, although there was no jurisdiction under the bid protest provision inserted by the Administrative Dispute Resolution Act because the Navy's attempt to lease its own property was not a government procurement, the Tucker Act's pre-ADRA, implied-in-fact contract jurisdiction for nonprocurement protests survived because ADRA did not otherwise provide a remedy for such disputes.
Contacts
Insights
Client Alert | 2 min read | 12.19.25
GAO Cautions Agencies—Over-Redact at Your Own Peril
Bid protest practitioners in recent years have witnessed agencies’ increasing efforts to limit the production of documents and information in response to Government Accountability Office (GAO) bid protests—often will little pushback from GAO. This practice has underscored the notable difference in the scope of bid protest records before GAO versus the Court of Federal Claims. However, in Tiger Natural Gas, Inc., B-423744, Dec. 10, 2025, 2025 CPD ¶ __, GAO made clear that there are limits to the scope of redactions, and GAO will sustain a protest where there is insufficient evidence that the agency’s actions were reasonable.
Client Alert | 7 min read | 12.19.25
In Bid to Ban “Woke AI,” White House Imposes Transparency Requirements on Contractors
Client Alert | 5 min read | 12.19.25
Navigating California’s Evolving Microplastics Landscape in 2026
Client Alert | 19 min read | 12.18.25
2025 GAO Bid Protest Annual Report: Where Have All the Protests Gone?
