Courts, Boards, & GAO

Trending Now

“Close Enough” Isn’t Good Enough: Protester’s “Homebrew” Certification Sinks Proposal • Lost in Translation: GAO Upholds Rejection of Lease Written in Japanese • Bid Protests in Alaska • Federal Circuit Holds Challengers to CICA Stay Overrides Need Not Satisfy Four-Factor Injunctive Relief Test • The Clock Is Still Ticking — Claims Timeliness Across the Boards and at the COFC

Published on June 3, 2025 • Law

Protester Disputes the Definition of “Pending.” GAO Says It Doesn’t Matter

Rawpixel.com | Shutterstock

The protester argued the agency improperly eliminated its proposal because its women-owned small businesses (WOSB) certification application was not pending on the Dynamic Small Business Search (DSBS). It had filed its application a day before the due date and argued the common usage of "pending" dictated its application was pending in time. GAO denied the protest. Even if it was aware of the different interpretation of pending, the protester did not demonstrate it would have filed its application earlier.

Strategic Alliance, Inc., GAO B-423359

Protest - The protester objected to the elimination of its proposal from a competition. GSA issued the RFP for total integrated solutions for a multitude of services-based requirements. The protester argued the agency unreasonably concluded it was not a women-owned small businesses (WOSB). At the time of proposal submission, the Dynamic Small Business Search (DSBS) did not show the protester as a certified WOSB nor with a pending application.
"Pending" - FAR section 19.1505(e) provides that offerors with a pending application in DSBS may qualify as for evaluation. The protester argued DSBS should have shown its application as "pending" because the common definition of the term referred to a matter that has not been decided. It had filed its application for WOSB certification one day before the due date for proposals. The agency argued there was no ambiguity that an application was "pending" only after SBA completes an initial review of it. SBA had not yet performed its initial review.
Decision - GAO denied the protest. Even if the protester could show the term "pending" was ambiguous, it failed to demonstrate it was prejudiced by the ambiguity. There was no indication the protester would have done anything different -- such as file earlier -- if it had known the agency's interpretation of "pending."

The protester was represented by Tamika L. Medley. The agency was represented by Christopher Murphy of GSA. Jacob M. Talcott and Jennifer D. Westfall-McGrail of GAO participated in the preparation of the decision.

-- Case summary by Joshua Lim, Assistant Editor.

Get daily insights on bid protests, CDA claims, and contract litigation that shape the GovCon landscape with our Protests & Claims newsletter, delivering up-to-the-minute intelligence Monday–Saturday — Subscribe here.