detailed information regarding the costs that Lockheed Martin [ ]. Because, under the amended solicitation, [ ], and because the Army and Lockheed Martin assert that the technical requirements in the Solicitation need to be changed, ManTech has no real sense as to what final price Lockheed Martin might offer under the amended solicitation. In these circumstances, the court holds that the requirements of section 15.507 of the FAR do not require the Army to provide Lockheed Martin with ManTech’s pricing information. See Norvar Health Servs., B-286253.2, 2000 CPD ¶ 204, 2000 WL 1804708 (Comp.Gen.2000) (material changes to solicitation renders disclosure of offeror’s initial price meaningless); Sun Microsystems Fed, Inc., B-254497.2, B-254497.3, 94-1 CPD ¶ 318, at 10 (Comp.Gen. 1994) (<HOLDING>). Moreover, the court concludes that the
holding that a remote tippee must know that original exchange was given in exchange for benefit holding that a defendants contact with michigan customers through the mail and the wires where it constitute the doing of business there rather than simply the exchange of information rendered the assertion of specific jurisdiction consistent with due process holding that court had no obligation to inform pro se litigant of procedural requirements due to clear evidence in record including inter alia defendants mention of requirements in summary judgment motion that litigant knew requirements holding that the witness had accepted immunity in exchange for no prosecution holding exchange of information unnecessary due to changes in the agencys requirements and passage of time