Filing 48

ORDER: The Clerk is directed to enter judgment for Plaintiff. The government shall comply with the terms of the permanent injunction contained within this Order. Signed by Judge Matthew H. Solomson. (rag) Service on parties made.

Download PDF
In the United States Court of Federal Claims No. 21-1186C (Filed: July 14, 2021) SIERRA NEVADA CORPORATION, Plaintiff, v. THE UNITED STATES, Defendant, and SIKORSKY AIRCRAFT CORPORATION, DefendantIntervenor. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ORDER AND JUDGMENT For the reasons explained in the Court’s July 1, 2021 decision, Plaintiff’s Motion for Judgment on the Administrative Record (ECF No. 23) is GRANTED, and Defendant’s and Defendant-Intervenor’s Cross-Motions for Judgment on the Administrative Record (ECF No. 22, 24) are DENIED. See ECF No. 44. In that decision, the Court further ordered the government to propose terms of a permanent injunction in consultation with the other parties. Id. at 24. On July 14, 2021, the government filed a status report, proposing permanent injunction terms, which the other parties do not oppose. ECF No. 47. Accordingly, upon consideration of Plaintiff’s request for permanent injunctive relief, the Court adopts the government’s unopposed proposed injunctive relief terms, and ORDERS as follows: (1) The United States Air Force is hereby enjoined from awarding to Sikorsky Aircraft Corporation (“Sikorsky”) any delivery orders under the ID/IQ contract contemplated in the Justification & Approval (“J&A”) approved on January 19, 2021 to perform any new capability upgrades on the Combat Rescue Helicopter (“CRH”) after the earlier of either: (a) the Air Force awarding the orders necessary to commence the first three contemplated capability upgrades (a degraded visual environment (“DVE”) sensor and system, Global Positioning System Anti-Jam/Anti-Spoof (“GPS-AJ”) capability, and mobile user objective system (“MUOS”)), or (b) the Air Force receiving from Sikorsky the complete Technical Data Package (“TDP”) for the CRH aircraft in accordance with the terms of the CRH production contract. (2) The U.S. Air Force shall compete any work to accomplish additional capability upgrades on the CRH aircraft that are not already under contract prior to the earlier of (a) or (b) above, unless an exception to competition under 10 U.S.C. § 2304 applies and a separate J&A authorizing a sole-source award is approved. The Clerk is directed to enter JUDGMENT accordingly. IT IS SO ORDERED. s/Matthew H. Solomson Matthew H. Solomson Judge 2

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?