WASHINGTON, D.C. — A development company is asking a federal judge to set aside the construction and lease contract for Butler’s new VA Butler Healthcare center, and to order the government to revisit its bidding process.

Pittsburgh-based Oxford Development Co. filed the suit, a bid protest, in the U.S. Court of Federal Claims on June 26, saying that it’s not satisfied with the scope of corrective action that VA officials agreed to as part of a previous complaint filed by the company.

In its suit, Oxford asks Judge Victor Wolski to issue a temporary restraining order and injunctions to the government preventing work on the project; order the VA to revisit the bidding process; and award Oxford monetary damages and “other relief” tied to its costs and legal fees.

The filing is the latest court action in the long-running dispute over the rights to develop the site of the county’s new VA center.

In 2012 the project was awarded to the Westar Development Co. But the following year the government initiated an investigation into that contract after contractor Michael Forlani pleaded guilty to bribery and racketeering charges in another previous project.

Those charges included allegations that Forlani obtained confidential information from high-level VA officials that helped the company win government contracts, and that Westar was acting as a front company for Forlani.

Forlani, 55, was sentenced in 2013 to 97 months in federal prison.

VA officials ultimately terminated the Westar contract.

Then in 2014 the VA awarded the project to Cambridge Healthcare Solutions, and the clinic’s location was moved from the Deshon Woods site off Route 68 in Butler Township to the Herold site off North Duffy Road in Center Township.

Oxford, which obtained an option on the Deshon Woods property from Westar and participated in the second round of project bidding, filed a protest with the U.S. Government Accountability Office in January of this year. That protest cited “irregularities” with the way VA officials decided to re-award the contract to Cambridge. The company called the award illegal and improper.

The VA, in a response filed in February with the GAO, asked that Oxford’s protest be dismissed in its entirety, and said the selection of Cambridge was “reasonable and consistent” with the way the agency scores proposals and awards large construction contracts.

Ultimately, the GAO rejected Oxford’s protest and determined the company was only entitled to financial compensation from the VA for its bid proposal and protest costs.

In Oxford’s filing a week ago, the company said negotiations with the VA over that settlement have been ongoing since April, but were scuttled June 10, when the government abruptly told Cambridge to proceed with the construction project.

In its own court filing seeking to intervene in the case, Cambridge said the present net value of the project is estimated at $127 million over the 20-year lease term.

On Monday Wolski granted Cambridge’s request to intervene, making the company and the government co-defendants.

In its court filing, Cambridge said it expects to file a motion to dismiss Oxford’s latest protest, arguing that Oxford lacks the legal standing to halt its work and isn’t entitled to anything beyond the GAO’s ruling.

In an additional filing Thursday, Cambridge said it plans to complete buying the Herold property within the next week, which it says would allow preparation work to begin on the site.

In a response filed today, Oxford said Cambridge’s announcement is out-of-line with its previous filings, on which scheduling orders issued by Wolski were based.

The judge had deferred a ruling on Oxford’s request for a preliminary injunction, the company says, because Cambridge claimed it would not immediately close on the Herold property.

Oxford renewed its requests for immediate rulings on a preliminary injunction and temporary restraining order, and asked that Wolski issue an order ruling that Cambridge would be proceeding “entirely at (their) own risk.”

Attorneys for both companies did not return messages left seeking comment on the lawsuit.

According to online court documents, a hearing on motions in the case will be Sept. 1.