Apache Produce Imports, LLC v. Malena Produce, Inc.

How courts have described this case

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

• explaining that the two types of services were bid and worked on by different groups of contractors
• noting that, while the defendantontervenor objected to supplemental declarations, it did not ob ject, in principle, to the submission of harm declarations
• stating that jfudicial notice can be taken of factual material available on the Internet
• noting that the admitted lay opinion testimony did not require any particular expertise or specialization in government contracting but instead was “based entirely upon personal experience and observations obtained through the declarants’ line of work”
• supplementing record with declarations from disappointed bidder’s employees because material was significant to understanding the issues in the bid protest
• supplementing record with declarations from disappointed bidder’s employees because material was significant to understanding the issues in the bid protest

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).