GSBCA 13313-P DISMISSED:  July 18, 1995
                                                          
 
 
                GSBCA 13313-P, 13315-P, 13320-P, 13324-P
 
 
                       CONCEPT AUTOMATION, INC.,
 
                                  and
 
                       TELOS SYSTEMS INTEGRATION,
                    A DIVISION OF TELOS CORPORATION,
 
                                  and
 
                   SYSOREX INFORMATION SYSTEMS, INC.,
 
                                  and
 
                INTERNATIONAL DATA PRODUCTS CORPORATION,
 
                                           Protesters/Intervenors,
 
                                   v.
 
           ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES COURTS,
 
                                           Respondent,
 
                                  and
 
                       DUNN COMPUTER CORPORATION,
 
                                           Intervenor.
 
        Richard  J. Conway, William  M. Rosen,  Robert J.  Moss, and
   Kendrick  C.  Fong   of  Dickstein,  Shapiro  &   Morin,  L.L.P.,
   Washington,   DC,   counsel  for   Protester/Intervenor   Concept
   Automation, Inc.
 
        Timothy  Sullivan, Katherine S. Nucci, and Martin R. Fischer
   of   Dykema   Gossett   PLLC,   Washington,   DC,   counsel   for
   Protester/Intervenor  Telos  Systems  Integration,  A Divison  of
   Telos Corporation.
 
        Thomas  C. Papson  and J.  Keith  Burt of  McKenna &  Cuneo,
   Washington,   DC,   counsel  for   Protester/Intervenor   Sysorex
   Information Systems, Inc.
 
 
        Maria  F. Glinsmann  of  Glinsmann  & Glinsmann,  Chartered,
   Gaithersburg, MD, counsel  for Protester/Intervenor International
   Data Products Corporation.
 
        Dinah  Stevens,  Roberta  M.  Echard,  and  Linda  Horowitz,
   Administrative Office  of the  United States Courts,  Washington,
   DC, counsel for Respondent.
 
        Edward J. Tolchin of Fettman & Tolchin, Fairfax, VA, counsel
   for Intervenor Dunn Computer Corporation.
 
   BORWICK, Board Judge.
 
                                 ORDER
 
        On  June 23,  1995, Concept  Automation, Inc. (CAI)  filed a
   protest  against  the  award  of  a  contract  to  Dunn  Computer
   Corporation by  the Administrative  Office of  the United  States
   Courts.  The procurement at issue seeks to acquire automatic data
   processing  hardware and  software  to  operate  primarily  in  a
   networked office  environment.   CAI's protest  consists of  five
   counts  as  follows:  1) respondent  failed  to  eliminate Dunn's
   proposal   for   noncompliance   with  the   minimum,   mandatory
   requirements  of  the  solicitation;   2)  respondent  improperly
   evaluated Dunn's proposals;  3) respondent's best  value analysis
   was based  on inaccurate  and flawed  evaluations; 4)  respondent
   improperly accepted  Dunn's unbalanced  offer; and 5)  respondent
   improperly  accepted   Dunn's  offer  despite   Dunn's  incorrect
   certifications.   Dunn Computer  Corporation is an  intervenor of
   right in CAI's protest.
 
        On June 26, Telos Systems  Integration, a Division of  Telos
   Corporation,  filed its own protest against the same procurement.
   On June  29, Sysorex  Information Systems,  Inc.,  filed its  own
   protest  against  the same  procurement,  and  on July  3,  1995,
   International  Data Products  Corporation filed  its own  protest
   against  the   same  procurement.     All   four  protests   were
   consolidated.   All protesters  are intervenors of  right in  the
   other protests.   Dunn  Computer Corporation  also intervened  in
   each protest as an intervenor of right.
 
        The Board convened a prehearing conference and established a
   schedule for further  proceedings and set a date  for the hearing
   on the merits of  these consolidated protests.  On July 14, 1995,
   protester  CAI  filed  a  motion  to  dismiss  its  protest  with
   prejudice.    Neither the  other  protesters/intervenors nor  the
   respondent  has  any  objection to  CAI's  motion.   Accordingly,
   pursuant to Rule 28(a), CAI's protest is DISMISSED.
 
 
 
                                 ______________________
 
                                 ANTHONY S. BORWICK
                                 Board Judge