Caci, Inc.-Federal v. The United States

How courts have described this case

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

• noting that the court should only interfere with the procurement process in “extremely limited circumstances”
• remarking that “inferences of actual or potential wrongdoing” must be based “on hard facts” and not “on suspicion and innuendo”
• remarking that “inferences of actual or potential wrongdoing” must be based “on hard facts” and not “on suspicion and innuendo”
• stating that “a disappointed bidder has ‘no right . . . to have the contract awarded to it’” (alteration in original
• finding that a protestor “within the ‘zone of active consideration’” had “standing to challenge the proposed award”
• finding that a protestor “within the ‘zone of active consideration’” had “standing to challenge the proposed award”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).