_____________________________________________
 
              DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE:  November 4, 1993
             _____________________________________________
 
        
                             GSBCA 12638-P
 
 
                  INTEGRATED FEDERAL SOLUTIONS, INC.,
 
                                                     Protester,
 
                                   v.
 
             NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION,
 
                                                     Respondent,
 
                                  and
 
                 AUTOMATION RESEARCH SYSTEMS, LIMITED,
 
                                                     Intervenor.
 
        Shelton H.  Skolnick, Judy D.  Leishman, Amy M.  Hall, Bruce
   Trimble, and  Wayne W. Finegar  II of Skolnick &  Leishman, P.C.,
   Derwood, MD, counsel for Protester.
 
        Sumara  M. Thompson-King,  Office  of the  General  Counsel,
   National Aeronautics  and Space  Administration, Washington,  DC;
   and  Kent  N.  Stone,  Office of  Chief  Counsel,  Lewis Research
   Center, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Cleveland,
   OH, counsel for Respondent.
 
        Michael Hordell, Laurel A. Heneghan, and Jessica C. Abrahams
   of Petrillo &  Hordell, Washington,  DC; and  Rocky J.  Galloway,
   Corporate  Counsel  of   Automation  Research  Systems,  Limited,
   Alexandria, VA, counsel for Intervenor.
 
   NEILL, Board Judge.
 
                                 ORDER
 
        On October 12, 1993, the Board docketed a protest concerning
   a solicitation for  the procurement of automatic  data processing
   equipment by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration.
 
        On November  4, 1993, counsel  for protester filed  with the
   Board a  motion to dismiss  the protest with prejudice.   Counsel
   for protester indicates that both counsel for the respondent  and
   counsel for the intervenor are  aware of this motion and  have no
   objection to the motion.  
 
 
        Accordingly,  pursuant to the  agreement of the  parties and
   Rule 28(a),  this case is DISMISSED  WITH PREJUDICE.  The Board's
   order   of  October  15  suspending  respondent's  delegation  of
   procurement authority expires in accordance with its terms.    
 
 
 
                                           _________________________
                                           EDWIN B. NEILL
                                           Board Judge