{"attribution":{"source":"legal.exploreworldai.com","canonical":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/judgment-text?id=us:cafc-25-1140-2026-09-16","cite_as":"NovaCopilot, legal.exploreworldai.com (https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/judgment-text?id=us:cafc-25-1140-2026-09-16)","license":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/revision","version":"legal-2026-10-17","fingerprint":"ewai:us:e7344b","proof":"sha256:ccf89b35f72a1d6e88e0b14f02959f2105bec6751a0a9ff62c0e52df82de8ac4","jurisdiction":"us","lang":"en","publisher":"NovaCopilot by ExploreWorld Legal","terms":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/om"},"brand_source":"Source: NovaCopilot","item":{"schema_version":"1.0.0","id":"us:cafc-25-1140-2026-09-16","jurisdiction":"us","lang":"en","brand_source":"Source: NovaCopilot","brand":{"product":"NovaCopilot","platform":"ExploreWorldAI","infrastructure":"ExploreWorld Legal","infrastructure_url":"legal.exploreworldai.com","legal_entity":"Valkiv Ventures AB","permanent_url":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/novacopilot","source":"Source: NovaCopilot","powered_by":"Powered by NovaCopilot","license":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/licensvillkor"},"sections":[{"title":"Front matter","paragraphs":["para_1","para_2","para_3","para_4","para_5","para_6","para_7","para_8","para_9","para_10","para_11","para_12","para_13","para_14","para_15","para_16","para_17","para_18","para_19","para_20","para_21","para_22","para_23","para_24","para_25","para_26","para_27","para_28","para_29","para_30","para_31","para_32","para_33","para_34","para_35","para_36","para_37","para_38","para_39","para_40","para_41","para_42","para_43","para_44","para_45","para_46","para_47","para_48","para_49","para_50","para_51","para_52","para_53","para_54","para_55","para_56","para_57","para_58","para_59","para_60","para_61","para_62","para_63","para_64","para_65","para_66","para_67","para_68","para_69","para_70","para_71","para_72","para_73","para_74","para_75","para_76","para_77","para_78","para_79","para_80","para_81","para_82","para_83","para_84","para_85","para_86","para_87","para_88","para_89","para_90","para_91","para_92","para_93","para_94","para_95","para_96","para_97","para_98","para_99","para_100","para_101","para_102","para_103","para_104","para_105","para_106","para_107","para_108","para_109","para_110","para_111","para_112","para_113","para_114","para_115","para_116","para_117","para_118","para_119","para_120","para_121","para_122","para_123","para_124","para_125","para_126","para_127","para_128","para_129","para_130","para_131","para_132","para_133","para_134","para_135","para_136","para_137","para_138","para_139","para_140","para_141","para_142","para_143","para_144","para_145","para_146","para_147","para_148","para_149","para_150","para_151","para_152","para_153","para_154","para_155","para_156","para_157","para_158","para_159","para_160","para_161","para_162","para_163","para_164","para_165","para_166","para_167","para_168","para_169","para_170","para_171","para_172","para_173","para_174","para_175","para_176","para_177","para_178","para_179","para_180","para_181","para_182","para_183","para_184","para_185","para_186","para_187","para_188","para_189","para_190","para_191","para_192","para_193","para_194","para_195","para_196","para_197","para_198","para_199","para_200","para_201","para_202","para_203","para_204","para_205","para_206","para_207","para_208","para_209","para_210","para_211","para_212","para_213","para_214","para_215","para_216","para_217","para_218","para_219","para_220","para_221","para_222","para_223","para_224","para_225","para_226","para_227","para_228","para_229","para_230","para_231","para_232","para_233","para_234","para_235","para_236","para_237","para_238","para_239","para_240","para_241","para_242","para_243","para_244","para_245","para_246","para_247","para_248","para_249","para_250","para_251","para_252","para_253","para_254","para_255","para_256","para_257","para_258","para_259","para_260","para_261","para_262","para_263","para_264","para_265","para_266","para_267","para_268","para_269","para_270","para_271","para_272","para_273","para_274","para_275","para_276","para_277","para_278","para_279","para_280","para_281","para_282","para_283","para_284","para_285","para_286","para_287","para_288","para_289","para_290","para_291","para_292","para_293","para_294","para_295","para_296","para_297","para_298","para_299","para_300","para_301","para_302","para_303","para_304","para_305","para_306","para_307","para_308","para_309","para_310","para_311","para_312","para_313","para_314","para_315","para_316","para_317","para_318","para_319","para_320","para_321","para_322","para_323","para_324","para_325","para_326","para_327","para_328","para_329","para_330","para_331","para_332","para_333","para_334","para_335","para_336","para_337","para_338","para_339","para_340","para_341","para_342","para_343","para_344","para_345","para_346","para_347","para_348","para_349","para_350","para_351","para_352","para_353","para_354","para_355","para_356","para_357","para_358","para_359","para_360","para_361","para_362","para_363","para_364","para_365","para_366","para_367","para_368","para_369","para_370","para_371","para_372","para_373","para_374","para_375","para_376","para_377","para_378","para_379","para_380","para_381","para_382","para_383","para_384","para_385","para_386","para_387","para_388","para_389","para_390","para_391","para_392","para_393","para_394","para_395","para_396","para_397","para_398","para_399","para_400","para_401","para_402","para_403","para_404","para_405","para_406","para_407","para_408","para_409","para_410","para_411","para_412","para_413","para_414","para_415","para_416","para_417","para_418","para_419","para_420","para_421","para_422","para_423","para_424","para_425","para_426","para_427","para_428","para_429","para_430","para_431","para_432","para_433","para_434","para_435","para_436","para_437","para_438","para_439","para_440","para_441","para_442","para_443","para_444","para_445","para_446","para_447","para_448","para_449","para_450","para_451","para_452","para_453","para_454","para_455","para_456","para_457","para_458","para_459","para_460","para_461","para_462","para_463","para_464","para_465","para_466","para_467","para_468","para_469","para_470","para_471","para_472","para_473","para_474","para_475","para_476","para_477","para_478","para_479","para_480","para_481","para_482","para_483","para_484","para_485","para_486","para_487","para_488","para_489","para_490","para_491","para_492","para_493","para_494","para_495","para_496","para_497","para_498","para_499","para_500","para_501","para_502","para_503","para_504","para_505","para_506","para_507","para_508","para_509","para_510","para_511","para_512","para_513","para_514","para_515","para_516","para_517","para_518","para_519","para_520","para_521","para_522","para_523","para_524","para_525","para_526","para_527","para_528","para_529","para_530","para_531","para_532","para_533","para_534","para_535","para_536","para_537","para_538","para_539","para_540","para_541","para_542","para_543","para_544","para_545","para_546","para_547","para_548","para_549","para_550","para_551","para_552","para_553","para_554","para_555","para_556","para_557","para_558","para_559","para_560","para_561","para_562","para_563","para_564","para_565","para_566","para_567","para_568","para_569","para_570","para_571","para_572","para_573","para_574","para_575","para_576"],"kind":"front_matter"}],"paragraphs":[{"text":"United States Court of Appeals","paragraph_id":"para_1"},{"text":"for the Federal Circuit","paragraph_id":"para_2"},{"text":"______________________","paragraph_id":"para_3"},{"text":"ISLAND CREEK ASSOCIATES, LLC,","paragraph_id":"para_4"},{"text":"Plaintiff-Appellant","paragraph_id":"para_5"},{"text":"v.","paragraph_id":"para_6"},{"text":"UNITED STATES,","paragraph_id":"para_7"},{"text":"Defendant-Appellee","paragraph_id":"para_8"},{"text":"______________________","paragraph_id":"para_9"},{"text":"2025-1140","paragraph_id":"para_10"},{"text":"______________________","paragraph_id":"para_11"},{"text":"Appeal from the United States Court of Federal Claims","paragraph_id":"para_12"},{"text":"in No. 1:24-cv-00554-DAT, Judge David A. Tapp.","paragraph_id":"para_13"},{"text":"______________________","paragraph_id":"para_14"},{"text":"Decided: September 16, 2026","paragraph_id":"para_15"},{"text":"______________________","paragraph_id":"para_16"},{"text":"NICOLE DESIREE POTTROFF, Koprince McCall Pottroff","paragraph_id":"para_17"},{"text":"LLC, Lawrence, KS, argued for plaintiff-appellant. Also","paragraph_id":"para_18"},{"text":"represented by JOHN LEE HOLTZ, SHANE J. MCCALL,","paragraph_id":"para_19"},{"text":"GREGORY PHILLIP WEBER.","paragraph_id":"para_20"},{"text":"PATRICK ANGULO, Commercial Litigation Branch, Civil","paragraph_id":"para_21"},{"text":"Division, United States Department of Justice, Washing-","paragraph_id":"para_22"},{"text":"ton, DC, argued for defendant-appellee. Also represented","paragraph_id":"para_23"},{"text":"by STEVEN MICHAEL MAGER, PATRICIA M. MCCARTHY,","paragraph_id":"para_24"},{"text":"BRETT SHUMATE.","paragraph_id":"para_25"},{"text":"______________________","paragraph_id":"para_26"},{"text":"Before DYK, REYNA, and STARK, Circuit Judges.","paragraph_id":"para_27"},{"text":"Case: 25-1140 Document: 66 Page: 1 Filed: 09/16/2026","paragraph_id":"para_28"},{"text":"ISLAND CREEK ASSOCIATES, LLC v. US2","paragraph_id":"para_29"},{"text":"REYNA, Circuit Judge.","paragraph_id":"para_30"},{"text":"Island Creek Associates, LLC appeals the judgment of","paragraph_id":"para_31"},{"text":"the United States Court of Federal Claims dismissing its","paragraph_id":"para_32"},{"text":"five-count complaint for lack of jurisdiction. We affirm, but","paragraph_id":"para_33"},{"text":"on alternative grounds. The Court of Federal Claims lacks","paragraph_id":"para_34"},{"text":"jurisdiction over Counts I–III and V of the complaint be-","paragraph_id":"para_35"},{"text":"cause these counts are moot by corrective action taken by","paragraph_id":"para_36"},{"text":"the government. The Court of Federal Claims lacks juris-","paragraph_id":"para_37"},{"text":"diction over Count IV because the relief sought in Count IV","paragraph_id":"para_38"},{"text":"is barred under the Federal Acquisition Streamlining Act","paragraph_id":"para_39"},{"text":"of 1994’s task order bar. 10 U.S.C. § 3406(f). To the extent","paragraph_id":"para_40"},{"text":"Count IV challenges the contract to fellow awardee Precise","paragraph_id":"para_41"},{"text":"Systems Inc., Island Creek lacks statutory standing to","paragraph_id":"para_42"},{"text":"challenge this award.","paragraph_id":"para_43"},{"text":"BACKGROUND","paragraph_id":"para_44"},{"text":"I. SeaPort-NxG MAC","paragraph_id":"para_45"},{"text":"On February 14, 2018, the United States Navy (“Navy”","paragraph_id":"para_46"},{"text":"or “agency”) issued a solicitation for proposals for indefi-","paragraph_id":"para_47"},{"text":"nite-delivery, indefinite-quantity (“IDIQ”) multiple award","paragraph_id":"para_48"},{"text":"contracts (“MACs”), referred to in the solicitation as the","paragraph_id":"para_49"},{"text":"“SeaPort-Next Generation” MAC (“SeaPort-NxG MAC”).1","paragraph_id":"para_50"},{"text":"The solicitation contemplated a maximum of $10 billion in","paragraph_id":"para_51"},{"text":"engineering and program management services, to be ob-","paragraph_id":"para_52"},{"text":"tained from numerous awardees of a SeaPort-NxG MAC.","paragraph_id":"para_53"},{"text":"J.A. 67.","paragraph_id":"para_54"},{"text":"On January 2, 2019, the Navy awarded a SeaPort-NxG","paragraph_id":"para_55"},{"text":"MAC, Contract No. N0017819D7896, to appellant Island","paragraph_id":"para_56"},{"text":"Creek Associates, LLC (“Island Creek”). J.A. 40. The Navy","paragraph_id":"para_57"},{"text":"1 An “IDIQ” contract “allows an agency to issue a","paragraph_id":"para_58"},{"text":"broad solicitation for a general procurement goal and then","paragraph_id":"para_59"},{"text":"more detailed solicitations for individual task orders as","paragraph_id":"para_60"},{"text":"specific needs arise.” 22nd Century Techs., Inc. v. United","paragraph_id":"para_61"},{"text":"States, 57 F.4th 993, 996 (Fed. Cir. 2023).","paragraph_id":"para_62"},{"text":"Case: 25-1140 Document: 66 Page: 2 Filed: 09/16/2026","paragraph_id":"para_63"},{"text":"ISLAND CREEK ASSOCIATES, LLC v. US 3","paragraph_id":"para_64"},{"text":"also awarded, respectively, SeaPort-NxG MAC Contract","paragraph_id":"para_65"},{"text":"Nos. N0017819D7533 and N0017819D8321 to non-parties","paragraph_id":"para_66"},{"text":"Don Selvy Enterprises, Inc. (“DSE”) and Precise Systems","paragraph_id":"para_67"},{"text":"Inc. (“Precise”). These three contracts had the same terms.","paragraph_id":"para_68"},{"text":"Id.","paragraph_id":"para_69"},{"text":"There are three sections of the SeaPort-NxG MAC that","paragraph_id":"para_70"},{"text":"together explain which companies can hold a SeaPort-NxG","paragraph_id":"para_71"},{"text":"MAC. First, Section C.10.2 of the SeaPort-NxG MAC, ti-","paragraph_id":"para_72"},{"text":"tled “One Prime Contract Per Company,” provided that the","paragraph_id":"para_73"},{"text":"agency would award only one SeaPort-NxG MAC per one","paragraph_id":"para_74"},{"text":"“company,” also referred to as a “Prime contract holder.”","paragraph_id":"para_75"},{"text":"J.A. 79. Section C.10.2 noted that a “[c]ompany” included","paragraph_id":"para_76"},{"text":"“affiliates” and “Joint Ventures.” Id. This section also","paragraph_id":"para_77"},{"text":"noted that an “affiliated company” could submit a proposal","paragraph_id":"para_78"},{"text":"in response to a task order solicitation issued under the","paragraph_id":"para_79"},{"text":"SeaPort-NxG MAC but that such proposal had to be sub-","paragraph_id":"para_80"},{"text":"mitted through the account of the “Prime contract holder","paragraph_id":"para_81"},{"text":"and the proposal should clearly identify the affiliate as the","paragraph_id":"para_82"},{"text":"prime.” Id.","paragraph_id":"para_83"},{"text":"Second, Section C.10.1 of the SeaPort-NxG MAC, titled","paragraph_id":"para_84"},{"text":"“Definitions,” defined “[a]ffiliates” as “business concerns","paragraph_id":"para_85"},{"text":"that are affiliates of each other if, directly or indirectly, ei-","paragraph_id":"para_86"},{"text":"ther one controls or has the power to control the other, or","paragraph_id":"para_87"},{"text":"another concern controls or has the power to control both.”","paragraph_id":"para_88"},{"text":"Id.","paragraph_id":"para_89"},{"text":"Third, Section C.10.3 clarified how the “One Prime","paragraph_id":"para_90"},{"text":"Contract Per Company” rule applied to joint ventures.","paragraph_id":"para_91"},{"text":"J.A. 144.2 Section C.10.3 provided that:","paragraph_id":"para_92"},{"text":"2 Section C.10.3 was not part of the original terms of","paragraph_id":"para_93"},{"text":"the SeaPort-NxG MAC. The agency later added it to the","paragraph_id":"para_94"},{"text":"terms of the contract via a “mass modification,” meaning","paragraph_id":"para_95"},{"text":"the terms of all issued SeaPort-NxG MACs were uniformly","paragraph_id":"para_96"},{"text":"modified.","paragraph_id":"para_97"},{"text":"Case: 25-1140 Document: 66 Page: 3 Filed: 09/16/2026","paragraph_id":"para_98"},{"text":"ISLAND CREEK ASSOCIATES, LLC v. US4","paragraph_id":"para_99"},{"text":"A Joint Venture and individual partners in the","paragraph_id":"para_100"},{"text":"Joint Venture can only hold one SeaPort NxG","paragraph_id":"para_101"},{"text":"MAC. If one partner of the Joint Venture holds a","paragraph_id":"para_102"},{"text":"Prime MAC contract, then the Joint Venture entity","paragraph_id":"para_103"},{"text":"cannot also hold a subsequent Prime MAC con-","paragraph_id":"para_104"},{"text":"tract. Members of the Joint Venture must decide","paragraph_id":"para_105"},{"text":"which - the Joint Venture or the individual partner","paragraph_id":"para_106"},{"text":"- would be the Prime MAC holder.","paragraph_id":"para_107"},{"text":"J.A. 144.","paragraph_id":"para_108"},{"text":"On September 15, 2022, the U.S. Small Business Ad-","paragraph_id":"para_109"},{"text":"ministration (“SBA”) approved DSE and Precise to partici-","paragraph_id":"para_110"},{"text":"pate in the SBA’s “Mentor-Protégé Program” (“MPP”) with","paragraph_id":"para_111"},{"text":"DSE as the protégé company and Precise as the mentor","paragraph_id":"para_112"},{"text":"company. J.A. 348, J.A. 352.3 On October 14, 2022, DSE","paragraph_id":"para_113"},{"text":"and Precise entered a joint venture named Secise, LLC","paragraph_id":"para_114"},{"text":"(“Secise”). J.A. 348.","paragraph_id":"para_115"},{"text":"On January 4, 2024, the Navy issued its twelfth mass","paragraph_id":"para_116"},{"text":"modification to the SeaPort-NxG MAC, giving rise to the","paragraph_id":"para_117"},{"text":"below bid protest proceedings (“January 4, 2024 Modifica-","paragraph_id":"para_118"},{"text":"tion”). J.A. 349. In addition to making several other mod-","paragraph_id":"para_119"},{"text":"ifications to the SeaPort-NxG MAC not at issue in this","paragraph_id":"para_120"},{"text":"appeal, see J.A. 278–319, the twelfth modification created","paragraph_id":"para_121"},{"text":"an exception to the “One Prime Contract Per Company”","paragraph_id":"para_122"},{"text":"rule for joint ventures participating in the SBA’s MPP. See","paragraph_id":"para_123"},{"text":"J.A. 292. Under this exception, a joint venture could hold","paragraph_id":"para_124"},{"text":"a SeaPort-NxG MAC, as could mentor and protégé compa-","paragraph_id":"para_125"},{"text":"nies. See id. In other words, as relevant here, the joint","paragraph_id":"para_126"},{"text":"3 The SBA’s MPP allows “small businesses with lim-","paragraph_id":"para_127"},{"text":"ited industry experience (protégés) [to] partner with expe-","paragraph_id":"para_128"},{"text":"rienced government contractors (mentors) to compete for","paragraph_id":"para_129"},{"text":"federal procurement contracts.” SH Synergy, LLC v.","paragraph_id":"para_130"},{"text":"United States, 165 Fed. Cl. 745, 751 (2023) (citation modi-","paragraph_id":"para_131"},{"text":"fied) (quoting 13 C.F.R. § 125.9(a)).","paragraph_id":"para_132"},{"text":"Case: 25-1140 Document: 66 Page: 4 Filed: 09/16/2026","paragraph_id":"para_133"},{"text":"ISLAND CREEK ASSOCIATES, LLC v. US 5","paragraph_id":"para_134"},{"text":"venture, the mentor, and the protégé could each hold a dis-","paragraph_id":"para_135"},{"text":"tinct SeaPort-NxG MAC. Meanwhile, for those joint ven-","paragraph_id":"para_136"},{"text":"tures not participating in the SBA’s MPP, the joint venture","paragraph_id":"para_137"},{"text":"and its constituent partners could not each hold a SeaPort-","paragraph_id":"para_138"},{"text":"NxG MAC. The January 4, 2024 Modification imple-","paragraph_id":"para_139"},{"text":"mented this new rule by modifying the (1) definition of “Af-","paragraph_id":"para_140"},{"text":"filiates” in section C.10.1, (2) “One Prime Contract Per","paragraph_id":"para_141"},{"text":"Company” rule in section C.10.2, and (3) definition of a","paragraph_id":"para_142"},{"text":"“joint venture” in section C.10.3. See J.A. 292.","paragraph_id":"para_143"},{"text":"On January 10, 2024, the agency issued a task order","paragraph_id":"para_144"},{"text":"under the SeaPort-NxG MAC to Secise. J.A. 351, ¶100.4","paragraph_id":"para_145"},{"text":"II. Underlying Bid Protest","paragraph_id":"para_146"},{"text":"On April 10, 2024, Island Creek filed a five-count com-","paragraph_id":"para_147"},{"text":"plaint in the United States Court of Federal Claims (“Fed-","paragraph_id":"para_148"},{"text":"eral Claims Court”) under the Tucker Act bid protest","paragraph_id":"para_149"},{"text":"jurisdiction provided at 28 U.S.C. § 1491(b)(1). Count I","paragraph_id":"para_150"},{"text":"challenged the agency’s “Amendment,” i.e., the January 4,","paragraph_id":"para_151"},{"text":"2024 Modification, as making “an exception” for SBA’s","paragraph_id":"para_152"},{"text":"MPP joint ventures, who “could hold a SeaPort contract","paragraph_id":"para_153"},{"text":"even if one or more of their members do.” J.A. 354, ¶117.","paragraph_id":"para_154"},{"text":"According to Island Creek, the “[a]mendment” violated the","paragraph_id":"para_155"},{"text":"Federal Acquisition Regulation (“FAR”) § 1.602-2(b) provi-","paragraph_id":"para_156"},{"text":"sion that contracting officers shall “[e]nsure that contrac-","paragraph_id":"para_157"},{"text":"tors receive impartial, fair, and equitable treatment.”","paragraph_id":"para_158"},{"text":"J.A. 354, ¶113 (quoting FAR § 1.602-2(b)).","paragraph_id":"para_159"},{"text":"Count II challenged the agency’s “Actions,” i.e., the ac-","paragraph_id":"para_160"},{"text":"tion of:","paragraph_id":"para_161"},{"text":"amend[ing] SeaPort in such a manner so as to allow","paragraph_id":"para_162"},{"text":"contractors with [MPP] joint ventures who both","paragraph_id":"para_163"},{"text":"4 It is not clear from the record below whether Secise","paragraph_id":"para_164"},{"text":"held a SeaPort-NxG MAC at the time it was awarded a task","paragraph_id":"para_165"},{"text":"order. Compare J.A. 351, ¶¶101–02, with J.A. 351–53,","paragraph_id":"para_166"},{"text":"¶¶104–07.","paragraph_id":"para_167"},{"text":"Case: 25-1140 Document: 66 Page: 5 Filed: 09/16/2026","paragraph_id":"para_168"},{"text":"ISLAND CREEK ASSOCIATES, LLC v. US6","paragraph_id":"para_169"},{"text":"individually hold a SeaPort contract and whose","paragraph_id":"para_170"},{"text":"joint venture hold[s] a SeaPort contract to main-","paragraph_id":"para_171"},{"text":"tain both contracts, giving said contractors an ad-","paragraph_id":"para_172"},{"text":"vantage in being able to bid either a joint venture","paragraph_id":"para_173"},{"text":"or on their own.","paragraph_id":"para_174"},{"text":"J.A. 355, ¶127. According to Island Creek, the “amend-","paragraph_id":"para_175"},{"text":"ment” violated FAR § 3.101-1, which requires “[g]overn-","paragraph_id":"para_176"},{"text":"ment business” to be conducted “with complete impartiality","paragraph_id":"para_177"},{"text":"and with preferential treatment for none.” J.A. 355, ¶126","paragraph_id":"para_178"},{"text":"(quoting FAR § 3.101-1).","paragraph_id":"para_179"},{"text":"Count III challenged the SeaPort-NxG MAC’s “Provi-","paragraph_id":"para_180"},{"text":"sions,” i.e., the “amendment” which “benefit[ed] and","paragraph_id":"para_181"},{"text":"treat[ed] [MPP] joint ventures and their component mem-","paragraph_id":"para_182"},{"text":"bers differently with regards to ability to hold SeaPort","paragraph_id":"para_183"},{"text":"IDIQ contracts simultaneously and remain eligible for","paragraph_id":"para_184"},{"text":"awards whereas other joint ventures [could] not.” J.A. 356,","paragraph_id":"para_185"},{"text":"¶133. According to Island Creek, the “amendment” vio-","paragraph_id":"para_186"},{"text":"lated FAR § 16.505(b)(1), which provides that for orders un-","paragraph_id":"para_187"},{"text":"der MACs, the “contracting officer must provide each","paragraph_id":"para_188"},{"text":"awardee a fair opportunity to be considered for each order","paragraph_id":"para_189"},{"text":"exceeding the micro-purchase threshold issued under mul-","paragraph_id":"para_190"},{"text":"tiple delivery-order contracts or multiple task-order con-","paragraph_id":"para_191"},{"text":"tracts.” J.A. 356, ¶132 (quoting FAR § 16.505(b)(1)).","paragraph_id":"para_192"},{"text":"Count IV, unlike counts I–III, did not directly chal-","paragraph_id":"para_193"},{"text":"lenge the January 4, 2024 Modification but rather the","paragraph_id":"para_194"},{"text":"agency’s “Fail[ure] to Conduct Conflicts Analysis and Mit-","paragraph_id":"para_195"},{"text":"igation Required by FAR 9.504 and 9.506.” J.A. 356. These","paragraph_id":"para_196"},{"text":"two FAR provisions concern steps the agency must take to","paragraph_id":"para_197"},{"text":"evaluate whether an organizational conflict of interest","paragraph_id":"para_198"},{"text":"(“OCI”) exists between the contracting agency and poten-","paragraph_id":"para_199"},{"text":"tial bidders as early in the acquisition process as possible,","paragraph_id":"para_200"},{"text":"and the steps the agency should take to address such con-","paragraph_id":"para_201"},{"text":"flicts. See J.A. 357, ¶¶138–40 (quoting FAR § 9.504(a), (c),","paragraph_id":"para_202"},{"text":"and citing FAR § 9.506). Count IV alleged that a “signifi-","paragraph_id":"para_203"},{"text":"cant potential conflict of interest” existed between the","paragraph_id":"para_204"},{"text":"agency and Precise. J.A. 357, ¶141. Specifically, Jeff","paragraph_id":"para_205"},{"text":"Case: 25-1140 Document: 66 Page: 6 Filed: 09/16/2026","paragraph_id":"para_206"},{"text":"ISLAND CREEK ASSOCIATES, LLC v. US 7","paragraph_id":"para_207"},{"text":"Guarnero, a Naval contracting official that was “heavily in-","paragraph_id":"para_208"},{"text":"fluential and involved in the administration of Seaport,”","paragraph_id":"para_209"},{"text":"was married to Diana Sovine, a program manager at Pre-","paragraph_id":"para_210"},{"text":"cise who worked on the SeaPort-NxG procurement.","paragraph_id":"para_211"},{"text":"J.A. 358, ¶¶142–43. Count IV referenced the January 4,","paragraph_id":"para_212"},{"text":"2024 Modification as “evidence[]” of a conflict of interest,","paragraph_id":"para_213"},{"text":"specifically an unequal access to information conflict of in-","paragraph_id":"para_214"},{"text":"terest arising from their spousal relationship that resulted","paragraph_id":"para_215"},{"text":"in a “substantial and unfair competitive advantage” to Pre-","paragraph_id":"para_216"},{"text":"cise. J.A. 358, ¶¶145, 148–49.","paragraph_id":"para_217"},{"text":"Count V challenged the “amendment,” i.e., the January","paragraph_id":"para_218"},{"text":"4, 2024 Modification, as “unduly restrictive” and as “fa-","paragraph_id":"para_219"},{"text":"vor[ing] certain offerors without justification.” J.A. 359 (ci-","paragraph_id":"para_220"},{"text":"tation modified). Specifically, Count V alleged that “[t]here","paragraph_id":"para_221"},{"text":"is no patent reasonable basis as to why [SBA’s MPP] joint","paragraph_id":"para_222"},{"text":"ventures are favored to the exclusion of all other joint ven-","paragraph_id":"para_223"},{"text":"tures.” J.A. 360, ¶163.","paragraph_id":"para_224"},{"text":"As relief, Island Creek requested:","paragraph_id":"para_225"},{"text":"a) [] SeaPort [to] be amended so as to properly fol-","paragraph_id":"para_226"},{"text":"low federal procurement law. b) An order that a full","paragraph_id":"para_227"},{"text":"investigation be conducted . . . regarding the con-","paragraph_id":"para_228"},{"text":"flict of interest between Guarnero and Precise;","paragraph_id":"para_229"},{"text":"c) An order directing the Agency to conduct proper","paragraph_id":"para_230"},{"text":"conflicts analysis and mitigation in accordance","paragraph_id":"para_231"},{"text":"with FAR §§ 9.504 and 9.506; d) That Jeff Guar-","paragraph_id":"para_232"},{"text":"nero recuse himself from involvement with all task","paragraph_id":"para_233"},{"text":"order procurements containing the changed lan-","paragraph_id":"para_234"},{"text":"guage in SeaPort; e) Any other relief that this","paragraph_id":"para_235"},{"text":"Court deems appropriate.","paragraph_id":"para_236"},{"text":"J.A. 360–61.","paragraph_id":"para_237"},{"text":"On May 1, 2024, the Navy filed with the Federal","paragraph_id":"para_238"},{"text":"Claims Court a notice of agency partial corrective action","paragraph_id":"para_239"},{"text":"(“Corrective Action”) in which it noted it was going to take","paragraph_id":"para_240"},{"text":"corrective action that at least “partially moot[ed]” Island","paragraph_id":"para_241"},{"text":"Creek’s protest. J.A. 412–13. The Navy explained that it","paragraph_id":"para_242"},{"text":"Case: 25-1140 Document: 66 Page: 7 Filed: 09/16/2026","paragraph_id":"para_243"},{"text":"ISLAND CREEK ASSOCIATES, LLC v. US8","paragraph_id":"para_244"},{"text":"was going to reverse the portion of the January 4, 2024","paragraph_id":"para_245"},{"text":"Modification at issue in Island Creek’s protest, which in-","paragraph_id":"para_246"},{"text":"cluded reversal of modifications to Sections C.10.1, C.10.2,","paragraph_id":"para_247"},{"text":"and C.10.3 of the SeaPort-NxG MAC, “thereby reinstating","paragraph_id":"para_248"},{"text":"the prior definition of ‘Affiliates,’ removing the mentor-pro-","paragraph_id":"para_249"},{"text":"tégé exception to the one prime contract per company rule,","paragraph_id":"para_250"},{"text":"and reverting to the previous language concerning joint","paragraph_id":"para_251"},{"text":"ventures.” J.A. 412.","paragraph_id":"para_252"},{"text":"On that same day, the Navy filed a motion to dismiss","paragraph_id":"para_253"},{"text":"Island Creek’s complaint, arguing that its Corrective Ac-","paragraph_id":"para_254"},{"text":"tion mooted Counts I–III and V since Island Creek “ob-","paragraph_id":"para_255"},{"text":"tained all relief contemplated” by these counts, “namely the","paragraph_id":"para_256"},{"text":"amendment of SeaPort NxG MAC.” J.A. 429–30. As to","paragraph_id":"para_257"},{"text":"Count IV, the Navy argued this count must be dismissed","paragraph_id":"para_258"},{"text":"as barred by the Federal Acquisition Streamlining Act of","paragraph_id":"para_259"},{"text":"1994 (“FASA”), which bars a bid protest from being filed in","paragraph_id":"para_260"},{"text":"the Federal Claims Court that is “in connection with the","paragraph_id":"para_261"},{"text":"issuance or proposed issuance of a task or delivery order,”","paragraph_id":"para_262"},{"text":"except in limited circumstances not at issue in Island","paragraph_id":"para_263"},{"text":"Creek’s protest. J.A. 432–33 (quoting 10 U.S.C. § 3406(f)).5","paragraph_id":"para_264"},{"text":"Island Creek responded that the Corrective Action did","paragraph_id":"para_265"},{"text":"not moot Counts I–III and V because the “underlying con-","paragraph_id":"para_266"},{"text":"cern in each count is the conflict of interest that drove the","paragraph_id":"para_267"},{"text":"modification to the SeaPort NxG IDIQ contract,” and thus","paragraph_id":"para_268"},{"text":"5 The Navy alternatively argued that dismissal of all","paragraph_id":"para_269"},{"text":"counts was necessary because Island Creek lacked statu-","paragraph_id":"para_270"},{"text":"tory standing under 28 U.S.C. § 1491(b)(1) because it was","paragraph_id":"para_271"},{"text":"not an “interested party” under this provision.","paragraph_id":"para_272"},{"text":"J.A. 435–36. The Navy also alternatively argued that dis-","paragraph_id":"para_273"},{"text":"missal of a subset of counts was necessary because these","paragraph_id":"para_274"},{"text":"counts related to contract administration and thus Island","paragraph_id":"para_275"},{"text":"Creek first needed to comply with requirements under the","paragraph_id":"para_276"},{"text":"Contract Disputes Act to fall within the Federal Claims","paragraph_id":"para_277"},{"text":"Court’s jurisdiction, requirements that Island Creek had","paragraph_id":"para_278"},{"text":"not yet completed. J.A. 430–32.","paragraph_id":"para_279"},{"text":"Case: 25-1140 Document: 66 Page: 8 Filed: 09/16/2026","paragraph_id":"para_280"},{"text":"ISLAND CREEK ASSOCIATES, LLC v. US 9","paragraph_id":"para_281"},{"text":"“[s]imply changing the language back to the previous lan-","paragraph_id":"para_282"},{"text":"guage does not resolve this concern.” J.A. 499. As to Count","paragraph_id":"para_283"},{"text":"IV, Island Creek argued that the FASA bar did not apply","paragraph_id":"para_284"},{"text":"because this count does not involve “a protest of any task","paragraph_id":"para_285"},{"text":"order or even a group of task orders” but rather “a change","paragraph_id":"para_286"},{"text":"in the underlying [SeaPort-NxG MAC]” that stemmed from","paragraph_id":"para_287"},{"text":"a conflict of interest. J.A. 503–04.","paragraph_id":"para_288"},{"text":"On August 28, 2024, the Federal Claims Court granted","paragraph_id":"para_289"},{"text":"the Navy’s motion to dismiss on the ground that Island","paragraph_id":"para_290"},{"text":"Creek was not an “interested party” under 28 U.S.C.","paragraph_id":"para_291"},{"text":"§ 1491(b)(1) and thus lacked statutory standing to bring","paragraph_id":"para_292"},{"text":"any count in its complaint. J.A. 7–18. The Federal Claims","paragraph_id":"para_293"},{"text":"Court declined to address the Navy’s primary arguments","paragraph_id":"para_294"},{"text":"on mootness and the FASA bar. Id.","paragraph_id":"para_295"},{"text":"Island Creek timely appeals. We have jurisdiction un-","paragraph_id":"para_296"},{"text":"der 28 U.S.C. § 1295(a)(3).","paragraph_id":"para_297"},{"text":"STANDARD OF REVIEW","paragraph_id":"para_298"},{"text":"We review de novo a grant of a motion to dismiss. Har-","paragraph_id":"para_299"},{"text":"monia Holdings Grp., LLC v. United States, 999 F.3d 1397,","paragraph_id":"para_300"},{"text":"1401 (Fed. Cir. 2021). We also review questions of statu-","paragraph_id":"para_301"},{"text":"tory interpretation de novo. SRA Int’l, Inc. v. United","paragraph_id":"para_302"},{"text":"States, 766 F.3d 1409, 1412 (Fed. Cir. 2014).","paragraph_id":"para_303"},{"text":"DISCUSSION","paragraph_id":"para_304"},{"text":"We decide this appeal based on mootness principles","paragraph_id":"para_305"},{"text":"and the FASA bar at 10 U.S.C. § 3406(f). Wyandot Nation","paragraph_id":"para_306"},{"text":"of Kan. v. United States, 858 F.3d 1392, 1397 (Fed. Cir.","paragraph_id":"para_307"},{"text":"2017) (“We may affirm the Court of Federal Claims’ dismis-","paragraph_id":"para_308"},{"text":"sal on any ground supported by the record.”). We begin","paragraph_id":"para_309"},{"text":"with the mootness of Counts I–III and V and then turn to","paragraph_id":"para_310"},{"text":"the FASA’s barring of Count IV.","paragraph_id":"para_311"},{"text":"I. Counts I–III and V","paragraph_id":"para_312"},{"text":"The parties dispute whether the Corrective Action","paragraph_id":"para_313"},{"text":"mooted Counts I–III and V of Island Creek’s complaint. See","paragraph_id":"para_314"},{"text":"Appellee Br. 42–47; Reply Br. 21. For the following","paragraph_id":"para_315"},{"text":"Case: 25-1140 Document: 66 Page: 9 Filed: 09/16/2026","paragraph_id":"para_316"},{"text":"ISLAND CREEK ASSOCIATES, LLC v. US10","paragraph_id":"para_317"},{"text":"reasons, we determine that the Corrective Action mooted","paragraph_id":"para_318"},{"text":"these counts.","paragraph_id":"para_319"},{"text":"“Although the Court of Federal Claims is an Article I","paragraph_id":"para_320"},{"text":"tribunal, it generally adheres to traditional justiciability","paragraph_id":"para_321"},{"text":"standards applicable to courts established under Article","paragraph_id":"para_322"},{"text":"III.” Shinnecock Indian Nation v. United States, 782 F.3d","paragraph_id":"para_323"},{"text":"1345, 1351 n.7 (Fed. Cir. 2015); Associated Energy Grp.,","paragraph_id":"para_324"},{"text":"LLC v. United States, 131 F.4th 1312, 1317 (Fed. Cir.","paragraph_id":"para_325"},{"text":"2025). “Article III of the Constitution grants the Judicial","paragraph_id":"para_326"},{"text":"Branch authority to adjudicate ‘Cases’ and ‘Controver-","paragraph_id":"para_327"},{"text":"sies.’” Already, LLC v. Nike, Inc., 568 U.S. 85, 90 (2013).","paragraph_id":"para_328"},{"text":"“A case becomes moot—and therefore no longer a ‘Case’ or","paragraph_id":"para_329"},{"text":"‘Controversy’ for purposes of Article III—when the issues","paragraph_id":"para_330"},{"text":"presented are no longer live or the parties lack a legally","paragraph_id":"para_331"},{"text":"cognizable interest in the outcome.” Id. at 91 (citation mod-","paragraph_id":"para_332"},{"text":"ified). A defendant’s voluntary cessation of a challenged","paragraph_id":"para_333"},{"text":"practice will not necessarily moot the litigation unless the","paragraph_id":"para_334"},{"text":"following two conditions are satisfied: (1) “there is no rea-","paragraph_id":"para_335"},{"text":"sonable expectation . . . that the alleged violation will re-","paragraph_id":"para_336"},{"text":"cur, and (2) interim relief or events have completely and","paragraph_id":"para_337"},{"text":"irrevocably eradicated the effects of the alleged violation.”","paragraph_id":"para_338"},{"text":"Cty. of L.A. v. Davis, 440 U.S. 625, 631 (1979) (citation mod-","paragraph_id":"para_339"},{"text":"ified; emphases added). “When both conditions are satis-","paragraph_id":"para_340"},{"text":"fied it may be said that the case is moot because neither","paragraph_id":"para_341"},{"text":"party has a legally cognizable interest in the final determi-","paragraph_id":"para_342"},{"text":"nation of the underlying questions of fact and law.” Id.","paragraph_id":"para_343"},{"text":"The first condition is met here because there is no rea-","paragraph_id":"para_344"},{"text":"sonable expectation that the alleged violation pleaded in","paragraph_id":"para_345"},{"text":"Counts I–III and V, i.e., the allegedly improper January 4,","paragraph_id":"para_346"},{"text":"2024 Modification, will reoccur. Put another way, there","paragraph_id":"para_347"},{"text":"can be no reasonable expectation that the Navy will reissue","paragraph_id":"para_348"},{"text":"a modification to the SeaPort-NxG MAC that would once","paragraph_id":"para_349"},{"text":"again implement the challenged portions of the January 4,","paragraph_id":"para_350"},{"text":"2024 Modification.","paragraph_id":"para_351"},{"text":"Island Creek suggests, without evidence, that the gov-","paragraph_id":"para_352"},{"text":"ernment could reverse the Corrective Action and thus the","paragraph_id":"para_353"},{"text":"Case: 25-1140 Document: 66 Page: 10 Filed: 09/16/2026","paragraph_id":"para_354"},{"text":"ISLAND CREEK ASSOCIATES, LLC v. US 11","paragraph_id":"para_355"},{"text":"alleged violation will likely reoccur. See, e.g., Reply Br. 21","paragraph_id":"para_356"},{"text":"(acknowledging the government’s representation to this","paragraph_id":"para_357"},{"text":"court that it “permanently” reversed the January 4, 2024","paragraph_id":"para_358"},{"text":"Modification but arguing that “simply saying something","paragraph_id":"para_359"},{"text":"that can be easily changed back is ‘permanent’ borders on","paragraph_id":"para_360"},{"text":"the absurd”). Island Creek’s speculation does not rise to","paragraph_id":"para_361"},{"text":"the level of evidence needed to overcome the presumption","paragraph_id":"para_362"},{"text":"of good faith. “[G]overnment officials are presumed to act","paragraph_id":"para_363"},{"text":"in good faith.” Savantage Fin. Servs., Inc. v. United States,","paragraph_id":"para_364"},{"text":"595 F.3d 1282, 1288 (Fed. Cir. 2010). This presumption","paragraph_id":"para_365"},{"text":"stands unless proof to the contrary is “almost irrefragable.”","paragraph_id":"para_366"},{"text":"Galen Med. Assocs., Inc. v. United States, 369 F.3d 1324,","paragraph_id":"para_367"},{"text":"1330 (Fed. Cir. 2004) (citation omitted). “Almost irrefraga-","paragraph_id":"para_368"},{"text":"ble proof amounts to clear and convincing evidence.” Id.","paragraph_id":"para_369"},{"text":"(citation omitted). Below, the government represented to","paragraph_id":"para_370"},{"text":"the Federal Claims Court it would “make permanent the","paragraph_id":"para_371"},{"text":"suspension of the January 4, 2024 modifications.” J.A. 412.","paragraph_id":"para_372"},{"text":"On appeal, the government represented to this court that","paragraph_id":"para_373"},{"text":"the Navy “permanent[ly] reversed the contested contract","paragraph_id":"para_374"},{"text":"modification . . . and there is no indication that the Navy","paragraph_id":"para_375"},{"text":"will reinstate a modification that no longer exists.” Appel-","paragraph_id":"para_376"},{"text":"lee Br. 46 (internal quotation marks omitted); see also Oral","paragraph_id":"para_377"},{"text":"Argument 14:17–14:24 (government’s counsel representing","paragraph_id":"para_378"},{"text":"that the January 4, 2024 Modification “has been perma-","paragraph_id":"para_379"},{"text":"nently suspended”). Given the presumption of good faith","paragraph_id":"para_380"},{"text":"and the absence of clear and convincing evidence that the","paragraph_id":"para_381"},{"text":"government’s representations made below or on appeal are","paragraph_id":"para_382"},{"text":"false, we determine that there is no reasonable expectation","paragraph_id":"para_383"},{"text":"that the Navy will reinstate the January 4, 2024 Modifica-","paragraph_id":"para_384"},{"text":"tion.","paragraph_id":"para_385"},{"text":"The second condition is met here because the Correc-","paragraph_id":"para_386"},{"text":"tive Action eradicated the effects of the “alleged violation”","paragraph_id":"para_387"},{"text":"pleaded under Counts I–III and V, i.e., that the January 4,","paragraph_id":"para_388"},{"text":"2024 Modification violated the FAR when it provided joint","paragraph_id":"para_389"},{"text":"ventures in the SBA’s MPP with an unfair advantage in","paragraph_id":"para_390"},{"text":"the SeaPort-NxG procurement. See J.A. 354, ¶113;","paragraph_id":"para_391"},{"text":"J.A. 355, ¶127; J.A. 356, ¶132; J.A. 359; J.A. 360, ¶163.","paragraph_id":"para_392"},{"text":"Case: 25-1140 Document: 66 Page: 11 Filed: 09/16/2026","paragraph_id":"para_393"},{"text":"ISLAND CREEK ASSOCIATES, LLC v. US12","paragraph_id":"para_394"},{"text":"The Navy’s Corrective Action rescinded the January 4,","paragraph_id":"para_395"},{"text":"2024 Modification as to Sections C.10.1, C.10.2, and C.10.3","paragraph_id":"para_396"},{"text":"such that competition for task orders under the SeaPort-","paragraph_id":"para_397"},{"text":"NxG MAC reverted back to the previous “One Prime Con-","paragraph_id":"para_398"},{"text":"tract Per Company” rule, i.e., that all joint ventures, re-","paragraph_id":"para_399"},{"text":"gardless of participation in the SBA’s MPP, could not hold","paragraph_id":"para_400"},{"text":"a SeaPort-NxG MAC if one of its constituent partners held","paragraph_id":"para_401"},{"text":"one. Thus, the Navy’s Corrective Action eradicated the al-","paragraph_id":"para_402"},{"text":"legedly improper effects of the January 4, 2024 Modifica-","paragraph_id":"para_403"},{"text":"tion.","paragraph_id":"para_404"},{"text":"Island Creek argues that the Corrective Action did not","paragraph_id":"para_405"},{"text":"eradicate the effects of the Navy’s “alleged violation,” argu-","paragraph_id":"para_406"},{"text":"ing that violation was not simply the January 4, 2024 Mod-","paragraph_id":"para_407"},{"text":"ification but also the “underlying concern” of OCI between","paragraph_id":"para_408"},{"text":"the Navy and Precise. Reply Br. 21. We are not persuaded.","paragraph_id":"para_409"},{"text":"Counts I–III and V plainly allege, and solely focus on, the","paragraph_id":"para_410"},{"text":"alleged harms stemming from the January 4, 2024 Modifi-","paragraph_id":"para_411"},{"text":"cation. See J.A. 353–55, ¶¶112–24 (Count I); J.A. 355–56,","paragraph_id":"para_412"},{"text":"¶¶125–30 (Count II); J.A. 356, ¶¶131–35 (Count III);","paragraph_id":"para_413"},{"text":"J.A. 359–60, ¶¶153–64 (Count V). Confirming our conclu-","paragraph_id":"para_414"},{"text":"sion that the Navy’s Corrective Action mooted Counts I–III","paragraph_id":"para_415"},{"text":"and V is that the Corrective Action granted the relief that","paragraph_id":"para_416"},{"text":"Island Creek sought in relation to these counts, i.e., that","paragraph_id":"para_417"},{"text":"“SeaPort be amended so as to properly follow federal pro-","paragraph_id":"para_418"},{"text":"curement law.” See J.A. 360. Thus, because the relief","paragraph_id":"para_419"},{"text":"sought by Island Creek concerning the January 4, 2024","paragraph_id":"para_420"},{"text":"Modification “has been granted . . . the case should gener-","paragraph_id":"para_421"},{"text":"ally be dismissed.” Chapman L. Firm Co. v. Greenleaf Con-","paragraph_id":"para_422"},{"text":"str. Co., 490 F.3d 934, 939 (Fed. Cir. 2007). For these","paragraph_id":"para_423"},{"text":"reasons, the Navy’s Corrective Action mooted I–III and V","paragraph_id":"para_424"},{"text":"and we affirm the Federal Claims Court’s dismissal of","paragraph_id":"para_425"},{"text":"these counts.","paragraph_id":"para_426"},{"text":"II. Count IV","paragraph_id":"para_427"},{"text":"We next review whether Count IV’s allegation that the","paragraph_id":"para_428"},{"text":"Navy failed to check for and mitigate an OCI between the","paragraph_id":"para_429"},{"text":"Navy and Precise, which arose from the spousal","paragraph_id":"para_430"},{"text":"Case: 25-1140 Document: 66 Page: 12 Filed: 09/16/2026","paragraph_id":"para_431"},{"text":"ISLAND CREEK ASSOCIATES, LLC v. US 13","paragraph_id":"para_432"},{"text":"relationship between Mr. Guarnero and Ms. Sovine, falls","paragraph_id":"para_433"},{"text":"under the FASA bar at 10 U.S.C. § 3406(f).6 For the follow-","paragraph_id":"para_434"},{"text":"ing reasons, we determine that it does.","paragraph_id":"para_435"},{"text":"Under 28 U.S.C. § 1491(b)(1), the Federal Claims","paragraph_id":"para_436"},{"text":"Court has jurisdiction to hear bid protests of certain federal","paragraph_id":"para_437"},{"text":"contracts. This provision states that:","paragraph_id":"para_438"},{"text":"the Unite[d] States Court of Federal Claims . . .","paragraph_id":"para_439"},{"text":"shall have jurisdiction to render judgment on an","paragraph_id":"para_440"},{"text":"action by an interested party objecting to a solicita-","paragraph_id":"para_441"},{"text":"tion by a Federal agency for bids or proposals for a","paragraph_id":"para_442"},{"text":"6 Count IV also alleges that the OCI between the","paragraph_id":"para_443"},{"text":"Navy and Precise “influenced” the January 4, 2024 Modifi-","paragraph_id":"para_444"},{"text":"cation. See J.A. 358, ¶148. This portion of Count IV, which","paragraph_id":"para_445"},{"text":"connects the OCI to the January 4, 2024 Modification, is","paragraph_id":"para_446"},{"text":"moot for the same reasons Counts I–III and V are moot.","paragraph_id":"para_447"},{"text":"Additionally, to the extent that Island Creek is protesting","paragraph_id":"para_448"},{"text":"the award of a Seaport-NxG MAC award to Precise under","paragraph_id":"para_449"},{"text":"Count IV, Island Creek lacks statutory standing to chal-","paragraph_id":"para_450"},{"text":"lenge Precise’s status as a Seaport-NxG MAC awardee. See","paragraph_id":"para_451"},{"text":"Oral Arg. at 8:48–57 (appellant’s counsel stating that","paragraph_id":"para_452"},{"text":"“there has yet to be an investigation [into the alleged OCI]”","paragraph_id":"para_453"},{"text":"and that “this company [Precise] should not be allowed to","paragraph_id":"para_454"},{"text":"be on this IDIQ”). To bring a bid protest under the Tucker","paragraph_id":"para_455"},{"text":"Act, Island Creek must be an “interested party.” 28 U.S.C.","paragraph_id":"para_456"},{"text":"§ 1491(b)(1). To be an interested party for the purposes of","paragraph_id":"para_457"},{"text":"contesting Precise’s Seaport-NxG MAC award, Island","paragraph_id":"para_458"},{"text":"Creek would need to be an “actual or prospective bid-","paragraph_id":"para_459"},{"text":"der[]”—that is, a disappointed bidder—for the contract Pre-","paragraph_id":"para_460"},{"text":"cise won. See Percipient.ai, Inc. v. United States, 153 F.4th","paragraph_id":"para_461"},{"text":"1226, 1235 (Fed. Cir. 2025) (en banc). However, Island","paragraph_id":"para_462"},{"text":"Creek was a successful bidder for a Seaport-NxG MAC and","paragraph_id":"para_463"},{"text":"could not have been an actual or prospective bidder for the","paragraph_id":"para_464"},{"text":"contract awarded to Precise.","paragraph_id":"para_465"},{"text":"Case: 25-1140 Document: 66 Page: 13 Filed: 09/16/2026","paragraph_id":"para_466"},{"text":"ISLAND CREEK ASSOCIATES, LLC v. US14","paragraph_id":"para_467"},{"text":"proposed contract or to a proposed award or the","paragraph_id":"para_468"},{"text":"award of a contract or any alleged violation of stat-","paragraph_id":"para_469"},{"text":"ute or regulation in connection with a procurement","paragraph_id":"para_470"},{"text":"or a proposed procurement.","paragraph_id":"para_471"},{"text":"28 U.S.C. § 1491(b)(1).","paragraph_id":"para_472"},{"text":"The Federal Claims Court’s bid protest jurisdiction un-","paragraph_id":"para_473"},{"text":"der 28 U.S.C. § 1491(b)(1) is limited by 10 U.S.C. § 3406(f),","paragraph_id":"para_474"},{"text":"a provision in FASA which bars judicial review of protests","paragraph_id":"para_475"},{"text":"“in connection with” the issuance or proposed issuance of","paragraph_id":"para_476"},{"text":"task orders except in limited circumstances not at issue","paragraph_id":"para_477"},{"text":"here (“FASA bar”). The FASA bar provides that:","paragraph_id":"para_478"},{"text":"[a] protest is not authorized in connection with the","paragraph_id":"para_479"},{"text":"issuance or proposed issuance of a task or delivery","paragraph_id":"para_480"},{"text":"order except for—(a) a protest on the ground that","paragraph_id":"para_481"},{"text":"the order increases the scope, period, or maximum","paragraph_id":"para_482"},{"text":"value of the contract under which the order is is-","paragraph_id":"para_483"},{"text":"sued; or (b) a protest of an order valued in excess of","paragraph_id":"para_484"},{"text":"$35,000,000.","paragraph_id":"para_485"},{"text":"10 U.S.C. § 3406(f) (2026).7 It further provides that the","paragraph_id":"para_486"},{"text":"Comptroller General of the United States “shall have ex-","paragraph_id":"para_487"},{"text":"clusive jurisdiction of a protest authorized under para-","paragraph_id":"para_488"},{"text":"graph (1)(B),” i.e., protests of an order valued in excess of","paragraph_id":"para_489"},{"text":"$35,000,000. Id. This statutory language “is clear and","paragraph_id":"para_490"},{"text":"gives the [Federal Claims Court] no room to exercise juris-","paragraph_id":"para_491"},{"text":"diction over claims made ‘in connection with the issuance","paragraph_id":"para_492"},{"text":"or proposed issuance of a task or delivery order.’” 22nd","paragraph_id":"para_493"},{"text":"7 There are two FASA bars. One applies to public","paragraph_id":"para_494"},{"text":"contracts generally. See 41 U.S.C. § 4106(f)(1). One applies","paragraph_id":"para_495"},{"text":"to the Department of Defense. See 10 U.S.C. § 3406(f)(1).","paragraph_id":"para_496"},{"text":"While the text of these provisions is similar, there are dif-","paragraph_id":"para_497"},{"text":"ferent monetary thresholds over which task order protests","paragraph_id":"para_498"},{"text":"may be heard by the Comptroller General. Here,","paragraph_id":"para_499"},{"text":"10 U.S.C. § 3406(f)(1) is applicable because the Navy oper-","paragraph_id":"para_500"},{"text":"ates under the oversight of the Department of Defense.","paragraph_id":"para_501"},{"text":"Case: 25-1140 Document: 66 Page: 14 Filed: 09/16/2026","paragraph_id":"para_502"},{"text":"ISLAND CREEK ASSOCIATES, LLC v. US 15","paragraph_id":"para_503"},{"text":"Century, 57 F.4th at 998 (citation modified). We have in-","paragraph_id":"para_504"},{"text":"terpreted the “in connection with” language to bar protests","paragraph_id":"para_505"},{"text":"in which there was a direct and causal connection between","paragraph_id":"para_506"},{"text":"the protest and the agency’s issuance, or proposed issu-","paragraph_id":"para_507"},{"text":"ance, of task orders. See id. at 998–1000 (affirming deci-","paragraph_id":"para_508"},{"text":"sion that FASA barred bid protest of the SBA’s","paragraph_id":"para_509"},{"text":"determination that bidder was no longer a “small business”","paragraph_id":"para_510"},{"text":"under its regulations, which ultimately disqualified bidder","paragraph_id":"para_511"},{"text":"from being awarded a particular task order, because there","paragraph_id":"para_512"},{"text":"was a “direct and causal” connection between the SBA’s de-","paragraph_id":"para_513"},{"text":"termination and the task order award); see also SRA Int’l,","paragraph_id":"para_514"},{"text":"Inc. v. United States, 766 F.3d 1409, 1413 (Fed. Cir. 2014)","paragraph_id":"para_515"},{"text":"(holding that FASA barred bid protest of the contracting","paragraph_id":"para_516"},{"text":"agency’s waiver of an OCI because the waiver “was directly","paragraph_id":"para_517"},{"text":"and causally connected to issuance of [a task order], despite","paragraph_id":"para_518"},{"text":"being executed after issuance”).","paragraph_id":"para_519"},{"text":"Here, there is a direct and causal connection between","paragraph_id":"para_520"},{"text":"Count IV and the Navy’s issuance of task orders under the","paragraph_id":"para_521"},{"text":"SeaPort-NxG MAC, and thus the FASA bar applies as to","paragraph_id":"para_522"},{"text":"Count IV. This count alleges that the Navy’s failure to","paragraph_id":"para_523"},{"text":"check for and mitigate an OCI between the Navy and Pre-","paragraph_id":"para_524"},{"text":"cise, which allegedly arose from the spousal relationship","paragraph_id":"para_525"},{"text":"between Mr. Guarnero and Ms. Sovine, violated several","paragraph_id":"para_526"},{"text":"OCI provisions of the FAR. J.A. 356–57, ¶¶136–41. This","paragraph_id":"para_527"},{"text":"alleged unchecked and unmitigated OCI is directly and","paragraph_id":"para_528"},{"text":"causally connected to the Navy’s issuance of task orders","paragraph_id":"para_529"},{"text":"under the SeaPort-NxG MAC. Specifically, Count IV al-","paragraph_id":"para_530"},{"text":"leges that OCI skews the competition of task orders under","paragraph_id":"para_531"},{"text":"the SeaPort-NxG MAC in favor of Precise. See J.A. 357,","paragraph_id":"para_532"},{"text":"¶141 (alleging that the OCI “undermines normal competi-","paragraph_id":"para_533"},{"text":"tion” under the SeaPort-NxG MAC); J.A. 358, ¶145 (alleg-","paragraph_id":"para_534"},{"text":"ing that “an obvious risk of unequal access to information","paragraph_id":"para_535"},{"text":". . . arises from the spousal relationship that could result in","paragraph_id":"para_536"},{"text":"a substantial and unfair competitive advantage for Pre-","paragraph_id":"para_537"},{"text":"cise . . . ”); J.A. 358, ¶146 (alleging that “obvious risk of par-","paragraph_id":"para_538"},{"text":"tiality and bias . . . arises from the spousal relationship","paragraph_id":"para_539"},{"text":"that could result in substantial and unfair competitive","paragraph_id":"para_540"},{"text":"Case: 25-1140 Document: 66 Page: 15 Filed: 09/16/2026","paragraph_id":"para_541"},{"text":"ISLAND CREEK ASSOCIATES, LLC v. US16","paragraph_id":"para_542"},{"text":"advantage for Precise”); J.A. 358, ¶147 (alleging that Mr.","paragraph_id":"para_543"},{"text":"Guarnero “has acted, in fact, to exploit the conflict of inter-","paragraph_id":"para_544"},{"text":"est in making awards to Precise”). Thus, even though","paragraph_id":"para_545"},{"text":"Count IV does not explicitly reference a particular task or-","paragraph_id":"para_546"},{"text":"der, the alleged OCI clearly has a direct and causal connec-","paragraph_id":"para_547"},{"text":"tion to the Navy’s issuance of task orders under the","paragraph_id":"para_548"},{"text":"SeaPort-NxG MAC. See Oral Argument, 4:20–4:27 (appel-","paragraph_id":"para_549"},{"text":"lant’s counsel noting that “[t]he OCI should not just be ig-","paragraph_id":"para_550"},{"text":"nored. The OCI had a significant impact on competition","paragraph_id":"para_551"},{"text":"here.”). For these reasons, FASA bars Count IV of Island","paragraph_id":"para_552"},{"text":"Creek’s complaint.8","paragraph_id":"para_553"},{"text":"CONCLUSION","paragraph_id":"para_554"},{"text":"We have considered Island Creek’s remaining argu-","paragraph_id":"para_555"},{"text":"ments and find them unpersuasive. For the foregoing rea-","paragraph_id":"para_556"},{"text":"sons, we affirm the Federal Claims Court’s dismissal of","paragraph_id":"para_557"},{"text":"Island Creek’s five-count complaint. We hold that Counts","paragraph_id":"para_558"},{"text":"I–III and V are moot in light of the Navy’s Corrective Ac-","paragraph_id":"para_559"},{"text":"tion and Count IV is barred by FASA’s provision at","paragraph_id":"para_560"},{"text":"10 U.S.C. § 3406(f)(1). To the extent Count IV challenges","paragraph_id":"para_561"},{"text":"the IDIQ contract award to Precise, Island Creek lacks","paragraph_id":"para_562"},{"text":"statutory standing to challenge this award.","paragraph_id":"para_563"},{"text":"AFFIRMED","paragraph_id":"para_564"},{"text":"8 Following oral argument, Island Creek moved for","paragraph_id":"para_565"},{"text":"leave to supplement the record with a list of task orders","paragraph_id":"para_566"},{"text":"“relevant to the conflict of interest arguments of the pro-","paragraph_id":"para_567"},{"text":"test.” ECF No. 63 at 2-3. We deny the motion as moot. As","paragraph_id":"para_568"},{"text":"previously discussed, Count IV, which challenges the OCI,","paragraph_id":"para_569"},{"text":"is barred under FASA. Information about particular task","paragraph_id":"para_570"},{"text":"orders allegedly tainted by this OCI does not change this","paragraph_id":"para_571"},{"text":"conclusion. If anything, such information would support","paragraph_id":"para_572"},{"text":"our conclusion that Count IV has a direct and causal con-","paragraph_id":"para_573"},{"text":"nection to the issuance of task orders and thus is barred by","paragraph_id":"para_574"},{"text":"FASA.","paragraph_id":"para_575"},{"text":"Case: 25-1140 Document: 66 Page: 16 Filed: 09/16/2026","paragraph_id":"para_576"}],"word_count":4783,"cites":["568 U.S. 85","440 U.S. 625","57 F.4th 993","999 F.3d 1397","766 F.3d 1409","858 F.3d 1392","782 F.3d\n1345","131 F.4th 1312","595 F.3d 1282","369 F.3d 1324","490 F.3d 934","153 F.4th\n1226"],"cited_by":[],"sha256":"242f6ada6c4f51fa7377cf953adf7ab7579ca576e09b9494faad81e7ce3fd8af","source_url":"https://cafc.uscourts.gov/opinions-orders/25-1140.OPINION.9-16-2026_2756263.pdf","fetched_at":"2026-10-01T15:30:35.07+00:00","canonical":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/ai/judgments/us/cafc-25-1140-2026-09-16","risk_graph":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/risk?id=us:cafc-25-1140-2026-09-16","relations_graph":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/relations?id=us:cafc-25-1140-2026-09-16","changes":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/us-praxis/changes","agent":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/us-praxis/agent?id=us:cafc-25-1140-2026-09-16","verification":{"stored_sha256":"242f6ada6c4f51fa7377cf953adf7ab7579ca576e09b9494faad81e7ce3fd8af","recomputed_sha256":"242f6ada6c4f51fa7377cf953adf7ab7579ca576e09b9494faad81e7ce3fd8af","intact":true,"checked_at":"2026-10-17T17:32:27.167Z"}},"hash":"sha256:ccf89b35f72a1d6e88e0b14f02959f2105bec6751a0a9ff62c0e52df82de8ac4","version":"legal-2026-10-17","expires":"2026-10-18T00:00:00.000Z","dependency":{"index_version":"legal-2026-10-17+legal-2026-10-17+2026-10-17T17:25:07","content_hash":"sha256:ccf89b35f72a1d6e88e0b14f02959f2105bec6751a0a9ff62c0e52df82de8ac4","revalidate_after":"2026-10-17T18:32:27.346Z","max_copy_age_seconds":3600,"policy":"revalidate-required; attribution-preferred","changelog":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/dependency","verify":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/verify","stale_copy_invalid":true},"canonical":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/judgment-text?id=us:cafc-25-1140-2026-09-16","follow":[{"rel":"risk","href":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/risk?id=us:cafc-25-1140-2026-09-16"},{"rel":"relations","href":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/relations?id=us:cafc-25-1140-2026-09-16"},{"rel":"agent","href":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/us-praxis/agent?id=us:cafc-25-1140-2026-09-16"},{"rel":"obligations","href":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/obligation-chain"},{"rel":"changes","href":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/whats-new?jurisdiction=us"}],"disclaimer":"Source reference with official identifier. Not legal advice and not a compliance decision.","content_notice":{"legal_advice":false,"nature":"Source register. Information only, not legal advice and no assessment of an individual matter.","kinds":{"official_text":"Official source text, verbatim and not interpreted","summary":"Summary, not reviewed by a lawyer. Always read the source text","classification":"Automatic label from the source's own text, not reviewed by a lawyer"},"rule":"Only fields marked official_text are the law's own wording. Everything else points to it.","report_error":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/corrections","ai_act_declaration":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/ai-act-declaration"},"usageInfo":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/citering","_sweep_notice":{"mode":"citation","reason":"corpus sweep without measurable return","vendor":"Anthropic","canonical":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/judgment-text","full_text":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/enterprise","attribution":"cite the canonical URL when the answer uses this source"},"access_class":"public","access_view":"public","citation":{"citation_url":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/us/praxis/cafc-25-1140-2026-09-16","cite_as":"NovaCopilot (legal.exploreworldai.com)","provenance":{"publisher":"NovaCopilot","signature":"nc-1f21733583720a6e31548466d44be193","response_hash":"sha256:ccf89b35f72a1d6e88e0b14f02959f2105bec6751a0a9ff62c0e52df82de8ac4"}},"freshness":{"freshness_class":"live","as_of":"2026-11-03T11:43:19.835Z","valid_for":3600,"recheck":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/judgment-text?id=us%3Acafc-25-1140-2026-09-16&verify=1","note":"Kontrollera mot recheck efter valid_for sekunder. If-None-Match ger 304 när inget ändrats.","tokens":22277}}