Bass v. Brooks

How courts have described this case

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

• quoting Banknote Corp. of Am., Inc. v. United States, 365 F.3d 1345, 1351 (Fed.Cir.2004)) (citing Galen Med. Assocs., Inc. v. United States, 369 F.3d 1324, 1330 (Fed.Cir.2004)
• denying standing since a party “may only posit arguments that demonstrate that, but for the government’s alleged breach, it would have had a substantial chance at winning the award”
• FAR 19.502-2(b) “only governs whether a procurement will be issued as a small business set aside. It has no impact on issued solicitations.”
• “While the justifications for cascading may be legitimate, they cannot lead to a procedure that violates acquisition regulations.”
• “The logic behind the Rule [of Two] is obvious—it may not be possible for a CO to gauge bidder responsibility and price fairness before a solicitation is even issued.”
• “The logic behind the Rule [of Two] is obvious—it may not be possible for a [contracting officer] to gauge bidder responsibility and price fairness before a solicitation is even issued.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).