Court Clarifies Bid Protest Rules in Strata-G Solutions Case

The U.S. Court of Federal Claims has made a significant ruling regarding the timing of bid protests, clarifying that contractors cannot file a protest until an agency has made a formal award decision. This decision, issued on September 16, 2025, highlights the importance of understanding the distinction between advisory evaluations and final award determinations.

In the case of Strata-G Solutions, LLC versus the United States, the U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) issued a solicitation for an indefinite-delivery indefinite-quantity (IDIQ) contract related to aircraft support services. The evaluation process consisted of two phases, beginning with an assessment of each offeror’s prior experience and followed by a review of technical approaches and pricing. After the initial phase, CBP provided offerors with a confidence rating and a nonbinding recommendation on whether to proceed to the second phase.

CBP characterized its recommendation as “merely advisory,” aiming to guide offerors about their likelihood of receiving an award. Despite this advisory status, the recommendation was intended to help reduce unnecessary costs for those with low chances of success. Strata-G received a “some-confidence” rating in the first phase and was subsequently advised not to continue to the second phase.

Before the second phase evaluations could be completed, Strata-G filed a protest, arguing that CBP’s evaluation did not adhere to the solicitation terms. However, the court dismissed the protest on the grounds of ripeness, indicating that Strata-G’s arguments were based on the assumption that it would not win the award, which had not yet been finalized.

The court emphasized that CBP’s recommendation was merely a “glimpse into a possible future” and that Strata-G’s alleged injury was hypothetical since it still had an opportunity to be selected for the award. Thus, the court concluded that no ripe controversy existed until CBP rendered a final award decision.

This case serves as a vital reminder for contractors considering a bid protest. Before filing, it is crucial to confirm whether the agency’s action constitutes a definitive award decision or merely an intermediary step in the procurement process. Understanding this distinction can prevent unnecessary protests and ensure compliance with the court’s strict timing requirements.

For those in the contracting community, this ruling underscores the need for careful evaluation of agency actions and the importance of awaiting a final award decision before pursuing a protest.