Amazon Web Services, Inc. v. United States

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that an agency’s failure to consider the threshold issue of prejudice was, “by itself, sufficient to render the [agency’s] decision arbitrary and capricious” (internal quotations omitted)
• holding agency’s corrective action irrational because “it was not narrowly tailored to address discrete procurement defects”
• employing, by the same Court of Federal Claims judge, \narrowly target\ language when reviewing a corrective action
• “Contracting officers are afforded ‘an even greater degree of discretion when the award is determined based on the best value to the agency.’”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).