SHIRLINGTON LIMOUSINE & TRANSPORTATION, INC., Plaintiff, v. THE UNITED STATES, Defendant., 77 Fed. Cl. 157

Summary

The bidder contended that the prior General Accounting Office (GAO) filing established its status as a "prospective offeror." The court observed that the bidder filed a protest at GAO prior to the deadline for submission of proposals that was unsuccessful. Since the bidder chose GAO as the forum of resolution, it effectively relinquished the ability to file a timely protest in the U.S. Court of Federal Claims. The relevant principle was that a timely pre-award protest submitted to GAO did not confer a plaintiff standing to later bring a protest in the Court. Therefore, as a matter of law, the bidder's December 7, 2006 GAO protest did not confer "prospective offeror" status for purposes of standing. Accordingly, the bidder could only achieve "interested party" status as an "actual offeror." However, as a matter of law, the bidder was not an actual offeror. The record did not evidence affirmative misdirection by the Government in the case, or that it was impossible for the bidder timely ...