Cargo Transport Systems Company v. United States, 16-1481

Cargo Transport Systems Co. filed a bid protest challenging an award under a procurement after an initial negative responsibility determination prevented it from receiving the contract.
The Court dismissed the protest as rested on a waived ground (reliance on a waived challenge to the responsibility determination) and Cargo moved for reconsideration under RCFC 59.
While reconsideration was pending, the challenged contract was terminated for the government’s convenience and replaced by a bridge contract covering the same work.
Cargo was awarded that bridge contract (with options through March 8, 2018), so the disputed procurement was effectively displaced.
The government informed the Court of the termination; Cargo’s motion for reconsideration largely reargued previously rejected points.
The Court denied the motion for reconsideration as moot because the procurement was cancelled and Cargo received the bridge contract.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the protest remains live after the procurement was cancelled and replaced by a bridge contract	Cargo sought reconsideration and maintained its challenge to the award process	Government noted the procurement was terminated and replaced by a bridge contract awarded to Cargo	Protest is moot because the procurement was cancelled and Cargo received the bridge contract
Whether Cargo preserved its challenge to the responsibility determination	Cargo attempted to relitigate the responsibility issue on reconsideration	Government and Court treated the responsibility challenge as waived in the earlier dismissal	Court found the original dismissal proper; reconsideration merely reargued rejected points and was improper under RCFC 59
Whether Cargo suffered cognizable injury warranting relief (standing / relief viability)	Cargo implied injury from not getting the original award	Government pointed out Cargo received substitute performance via the bridge contract	No viable relief: procurement replaced and bridge contract precludes remedy on the protested procurement

Blue & Gold Fleet, L.P. v. United States, 492 F.3d 1308 (Fed. Cir. 2007) (waiver doctrine in bid protests)
Coastal Envtl. Grp., Inc. v. United States, 114 Fed. Cl. 124 (Fed. Cl. 2013) (cancellation of a procurement renders a protest moot)
Kellogg Brown & Root Servs., Inc. v. United States, 117 Fed. Cl. 764 (Fed. Cl. 2014) (limitations on standing for contractors offered sole-source contracts)
Tech. Innovation, Inc. v. United States, 93 Fed. Cl. 276 (Fed. Cl. 2010) (bid preparation costs do not necessarily render a protest viable when substitute contracts are awarded)
Del. Valley Floral Grp., Inc. v. Shaw Rose Nets, LLC, 597 F.3d 1374 (Fed. Cir. 2010) (standards limiting motions for reconsideration)