The case centers on a U.S. Navy procurement for the Consolidated Afloat Networks and Enterprise Services (CANES) program, specifically Request for Proposals No. N6600124R0022. The contract covered systems engineering, networking, communications, and computer system support, including upgrades, testing, cybersecurity, and integration work supporting naval operations and tactical networks. Performance would occur both at naval installations and aboard deployed ships. The contract was structured as a single indefinite-delivery, indefinite-quantity (IDIQ) award with a base period and option years, and was valued at roughly $100 million.
Noblis MSD, LLC challenged the Navy’s decision to award the contract to Solute, Inc., raising several issues related to how the Navy evaluated proposals, including cost realism, technical experience, and past performance. The court rejected most of Noblis’s arguments, finding that the Navy generally followed the solicitation and applicable rules in its evaluation. However, the court did find a specific error in how the Navy credited Solute with the past performance of an affiliated company without sufficient support showing that the affiliate would actually contribute to contract performance.
Despite identifying that error, the court did not grant Noblis any relief. The contract award to Solute remained in place because Noblis failed to properly support its request for injunctive relief, meaning it did not adequately argue why the court should overturn or halt the award. As a result, even though the court found a flaw in the Navy’s evaluation, Noblis did not succeed in changing the outcome of the procurement.
