Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

INTER-CON SECS. SYS. v. ORR

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA


March 29, 1983

INTER-CON SECURITIES SYSTEMS, INC., Plaintiff,
v.
Verne ORR, Secretary, Department of Defense, et al., Defendants

The opinion of the court was delivered by: PRATT

FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW

 JOHN H. PRATT, District Judge.

 Introduction

 This is an action by a disappointed government contract bidder, Inter-Con Securities Systems, Inc. (Inter-Con), seeking to enjoin performance of a contract for security patrol services at Los Angeles Air Force Station, California (LAAFS), that was awarded by the Air Force to the defendant intervenor, Delta Associates, Ltd. (Delta), on December 3, 1982. The performance starting date under the contract was January 1, 1983. Inter-Con filed its complaint, accompanied by motions for a temporary restraining order and for a preliminary injunction, on December 28, 1982, asking that we declare the contract award unlawful, enjoin its performance, and award the contract to Inter-Con. Judge Thomas F. Hogan heard and denied plaintiff's request for a temporary restraining order the same day, thus permitting performance to begin under the contract as scheduled. Thereafter, the government filed a motion to dismiss the action on the grounds that section 133(a) of the Federal Courts Improvement Act of 1982, Pub.L. No. 97-164, 96 Stat. 40 (1982), divests federal district courts of jurisdiction to consider post-award claims by disappointed bidders for declaratory or injunctive relief. The government and the plaintiff also filed motions for summary judgment. Delta has joined in the government's motions to dismiss and for summary judgment. All outstanding motions were heard by this Court on February 17, 1983. For the reasons set forth hereinafter, the Court denies the government's motion to dismiss, denies plaintiff's motions for a preliminary injunction and for summary judgment, and grants the government's motion for summary judgment.

 FINDINGS OF FACT

 1. The material facts are not in dispute. On July 22, 1982 the Department of the Air Force issued a solicitation for bids, restricted to small businesses, see 15 U.S.C. ยง 637(d) (1976); Defense Acquisition Regulations (DARs) 1-706, *fn1" for the operation and management of sensitive base security patrol services at LAAFS. The solicitation was for a one-year contract with four one-year options, with a contemplated beginning performance date of October 1, 1982. Bids were opened on August 20, 1982. Seven firms submitted bids, *fn2" as follows: FIRM AMOUNT OF BID 1. Security Associates, Inc. (SAI) $12,800,134.77 2. Modern Services, Inc. 13,537,585.18 3. Delta Associates, Ltd. 13,544,419.78 4. APO II Protection, Inc. 13,538,131.15 5. Washington Patrol Services 14,076,531.81 6. Inter-Con Security Systems, Inc. 14,763,075.00 7. Young Patrol Services 14,844,000.00

19830329

© 1992-2004 VersusLaw Inc.



Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.