You really have to give Oracle a lot of points for endurance, especially when it comes to the $ 10 billion JEDI cloud contract procurement process. For more than a year, the company has complained across all legal and regulatory channels it can think of. Despite any attempt to find any problem with the process, it has failed every time. That didn't stop today from filing a new appeal over last month's federal court decision found against the company.
Oracle refuses to go quietly into the good night, not when there is $ 1
protest exclusively the legal technique of Oracle's alleged lack of position. Federal procurement laws specifically exclude procurement of awards such as JEDI absent to meet specific, mandatory requirements, and the Court believes in its opinion that the DoD did not satisfy those requirements. The statement also acknowledges that the acquisition suffers from many significant conflicts of interest. These conflicts violate the law and undermine public confidence. As a threshold matter, we believe that the provision of no position is wrong as a matter of law, and the very analysis in the statement compels a provision that the procurement was illegal on several grounds, "said Oracle Attorney General Dorian Daley in a statement.
In December, Oracle sued the government for $ 10 billion, the time they focused most on an perceived conflict of interest involving a former Amazon employee named Deap Ubhi. He worked for Amazon before joining DOD, where he worked on a committee of people who wrote the RFP requirements, and then returned to Amazon later. The DOD investigated this issue twice and found no evidence that he violated federal conflict of interest laws.
The court finally agreed with DOD's findings last month, ruling that Oracle had failed to provide evidence of a conflict or that it had an impact on the procurement process. Judge Bruggink wrote at the time:
We also conclude that the mayor's finding that an organizational conflict of interest does not exist and that individual conflicts of interest did not affect procurement were not arbitrary, capricious, abuse of discretion, or otherwise not in accordance with the law. The plaintiff's motion for judgment on the administrative record is therefore rejected.
The company began to complain and cajole even before the JEDI RFP process began. The Washington Post reported that Oracle & # 39; s Safra Catz met with the president in April 2018 to complain that the process was unfairly stacked in favor of Amazon, which happens to be the leader in the cloud market share by a significant margin, with more than double its next closest rival, Microsoft.
Later, the company filed an appeal with the Government Accountability Office, which found no problem with the RFP process. The DOD, which has constantly insisted that there was no conflict in the process, also did so in an internal investigation and found no wrongdoing.
The president got involved last month when he ordered Secretary of Defense Mark T. Esper to take a closer look at the idea that the process has once again favored Amazon. That investigation is ongoing. DOD named two finalists, Amazon and Microsoft, in April, but has yet to announce the winner as protests, lawsuits and investigations continue.
The controversy partially involves the contract itself. It is potentially a decade-long commitment to build cloud infrastructure for DOD, involves the allocation of a single vendor (although there are multiple opt-out clauses during the contract period) and involves $ 10 billion and the potential for much more government work. That every tech company salutes for that contract is hardly surprising, but Oracle alone continues to protest every single turn.
The winner was supposed to be announced this month, but with the Pentagon investigation in progress, and another lawsuit in progress, it may take some time before we hear who the winner is.