Trident Techs., LLC v. United States

Trident Techs., LLC v. United States

Opinion

CAMPBELL-SMITH, Judge.

Plaintiff filed this bid protest challenging the Department of Defense (DOD), Missile Defense Agency's (MDA) award in its procurement of a support contract for its Advanced Research Center (ARC). See ECF No. 1 (complaint). Plaintiff filed a motion for judgment on the administrative record (AR) in this case, ECF No. 42; and defendant and intervenor-defendant each filed cross-motions for judgment on the AR, ECF No. 49; ECF No. 50.

In ruling on the [*2]  motions, the court has considered: (1) plaintiff's complaint, ECF No. 1; (2) the AR, ECF No. 32, ECF No. 35, ECF No. 41; ECF No. 53;² (3) plaintiff's motion for judgment on the AR, ECF No. 42, and corrected memorandum in support of its motion, ECF No. 58; (4) intervenor-defendant's cross-motion for judgment on the AR and response to plaintiff's motion, ECF No. 49; (5) defendant's cross-motion for judgment on the AR, and response to plaintiff's motion, ECF No. 50; (6) plaintiff's reply in support of its motion and response to the cross-motions, ECF No. 60; (7) intervenor-defendant's reply in support of its cross-motion, ECF No. 62; (8) defendant's reply in support of its cross-motion, ECF No. 63; and (9) plaintiff's supplemental brief in support of its motion, ECF No. 66.

The motions are fully briefed, and ripe for decision. The parties did not request oral argument, and the court deems such argument unnecessary. The court has considered all of the parties' arguments and addresses the issues that are pertinent to the court's ruling in this opinion. For the following reasons, plaintiff's motion for judgment on the AR is DENIED, and defendant's and intervenor-defendant's cross-motions [*3]  for judgment on the AR are GRANTED.

I. Background³

Full case includes Shepard's, Headnotes, Legal Analytics from Lex Machina, and more.