On the first CITT decision, the answer is yes, they decided that CITT had been patently unreasonable. We could have gone back and re-filed that at CITT, but that didn't appear to be a promising avenue.
We did try to challenge the urgency. When Public Works declared that this contract award had to proceed because it was urgent, we tried to get an injunction to stop them from doing that. This had never been done before. Nobody had ever tried to do this. The judge sort of semi-granted us the injunction, because he didn't rule for about a month or more. So it kind of did what we wanted. In the end, he didn't grant us the injunction. His rationale was, well, CITT is going to decide this issue fairly soon, so you don't need an injunction.
That's what happened.