BROADREACH HEALTHCARE PTY LTD v. United States, 1:24-cv-01719

USAID issued a funding opportunity in early 2024 to support HIV and TB epidemic control in South Africa's Mpumalanga province, structured as a $190 million, five-year cooperative agreement.
BroadReach, a for-profit healthcare enterprise, submitted a proposal but received no response and later protested USAID's use of a cooperative agreement instead of a procurement contract.
BroadReach's protest was dismissed by the GAO for timeliness and lack of a significant issue.
During the federal court litigation, USAID cancelled the funding opportunity due to a policy change and a pause in foreign aid by the new presidential administration.
The government moved to dismiss BroadReach’s lawsuit as moot, arguing there was no longer a live controversy since the funding opportunity was cancelled and could not be reinstated.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether USAID's use of a cooperative agreement (instead of a procurement contract) violated statutory requirements (FGCAA)	USAID unlawfully used a cooperative agreement to procure services that should require a contract	Use of a cooperative agreement was authorized; it fulfills a public assistance purpose	Not addressed on the merits due to mootness
Whether the court retains jurisdiction after cancellation of the funding opportunity	Mootness does not apply; the government should not avoid review and costs	Cancellation moots the case; no longer a live controversy	Court lacks jurisdiction; case dismissed as moot
Application of the voluntary cessation exception to mootness	Cancellation was tactical and does not preclude recurrence of alleged conduct	Cancellation was policy-driven, agency-wide, and final	Exception does not apply; no reasonable expectation of recurrence
Entitlement to bid or proposal preparation costs and fees	Should recover costs/fees even after cancellation	No recovery where award/solicitation was cancelled	Claims for costs/fees cannot revive a moot case

Powell v. McCormack, 395 U.S. 486 (case is moot when there is no longer a live issue or interest in the outcome)
Chapman Law Firm Co. v. Greenleaf Construction Co., 490 F.3d 934 (case should be dismissed as moot if relief has been granted or controversy resolved)
County of Los Angeles v. Davis, 440 U.S. 625 (voluntary cessation exception to mootness; party must show conduct won't recur; effects eradicated)
Lewis v. Continental Bank Corp., 494 U.S. 472 (attorney's fees do not create a controversy where none exists on the merits)
Already, LLC v. Nike, Inc., 568 U.S. 85 (voluntary cessation—mootness if no reasonable expectation alleged conduct will recur)