INTELLIBRIDGE, LLC v. United States
FOR PUBLICATION (2025)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
Under 41 U.S.C. § 3307, a federal agency's market research obligation is defined by the full scope of the commercial services it seeks to procure. An agency does not violate the statute by seeking a broad set of services, even if a small portion of those services overlaps with an existing nondevelopmental product that cannot fulfill the contract's overall requirements.
Facts:
- In 2021, RevaComm, a subsidiary of IntelliBridge, developed the batCAVE platform, a software product that automates the process for application developers to secure legally required authorizations to operate (ATOs) on CMS systems.
- Under a contract starting in September 2021, IntelliBridge licensed the batCAVE platform to CMS.
- In spring 2024, CMS decided to discontinue its use of the batCAVE platform, citing that it had not been widely adopted by CMS application developers.
- CMS then began developing an acquisition strategy to combine three existing contracts into a single, broader solicitation for the CMS Hybrid Cloud Product Engineering & Operations (PEO contract). The batCAVE contract was not one of those being combined.
- In April 2024, CMS issued a Request for Information (RFI) to conduct market research for the PEO contract, which sought a contractor to provide a wide array of cloud, engineering, and security services.
- IntelliBridge responded to the RFI, describing its batCAVE platform's capabilities but also noting that the platform was 'still in the early stages' with only about nine applications in production.
- CMS's subsequent Market Research Report (MRR) concluded the PEO contract was for commercial professional services and determined that IntelliBridge was 'not capable' of providing the full scope of required support.
Procedural Posture:
- On August 8, 2024, IntelliBridge, LLC filed a complaint in the U.S. Court of Federal Claims, initiating a pre-award bid protest against the United States.
- On October 8, 2024, IntelliBridge moved for judgment on the administrative record.
- On November 11, 2024, the United States filed a cross-motion for judgment on the administrative record.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Does the Request for Quotation (RFQ) issued by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) for the PEO contract violate 41 U.S.C. § 3307 by seeking to develop a new solution that replicates existing technology without conducting appropriate market research and giving preference to available commercial or nondevelopmental products?
Opinions:
Majority - Judge Hertling
No. The RFQ issued by CMS does not violate 41 U.S.C. § 3307 because the agency is seeking a broad set of commercial cloud computing and IT-management services, not a developmental solution designed to replicate the narrower functionality of IntelliBridge's batCAVE platform. The court found as a factual matter that the PEO contract is far more comprehensive than what batCAVE offers, covering areas like Hybrid Cloud Engineering and Operations, Enterprise Products and Tools Administration, and Enterprise Security Operations, which are beyond batCAVE's capabilities. The functionality of batCAVE constitutes only a 'modest and relatively insignificant portion' of the overall procurement. Therefore, CMS's market research, which was targeted at the broad commercial services it was actually seeking, was appropriate and satisfied its statutory obligations. The court further concluded that IntelliBridge could not demonstrate prejudice, as its product is unable to meet the RFQ's full requirements, meaning it would not have a substantial chance of winning the contract even if the procurement were altered.
Analysis:
This decision reinforces significant agency deference in defining the scope of its procurement needs. It clarifies that a protestor cannot succeed on a § 3307 claim by identifying a minor overlap between its niche product and a large, multifaceted government requirement. The ruling establishes that for such a challenge to be viable, the protestor's commercial product must be able to satisfy the substantial majority, if not the entirety, of the agency's stated needs. This places a high burden on protestors to demonstrate that an agency's broad solicitation is merely a pretext for recreating their specific product, rather than a legitimate effort to acquire a comprehensive solution.
