Arcata Associates, 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 a “[contracting officer’s] initial [NAICS code] designation and [the] OHA’s decision rejecting that designation ... are both ‘in connection with’ a proposed ongoing procurement” (quoting 28 U.S.C. § 1491(b)(1))
• reversing a special master’s award of interim attorneys’ fees and costs and remanding for a determination of whether there was reasonable basis for filing the petition

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).