EMTA Insaat, A.S. 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.

• explaining that there “is no dispute that the plain language of the RFP required the government to conduct a price realism analysis” when the solicitation provided that “[a]ll offerors[’j proposed prices will be evaluated to ensure they are realistic, reasonable, and complete”
• explaining that there “is no dispute that the plain language of the RFP required the government to conduct a price realism analysis” when the solicitation provided that “[a]ll offerors[’] proposed prices will be evaluated to ensure they are realistic, reasonable, and complete”
• explaining that there “is no dispute that the plain language of the RFP required the government to conduct a price realism analysis” when the solicitation provided that “[a]ll offerors[’] proposed prices will be evaluated to ensure they are realistic, reasonable, and complete”
• explaining that there “is no dispute that the plain language of the RFP required the government to conduct a price realism analysis” when the solicitation provided that “[a]ll offerors[’] proposed prices will be evaluated to ensure they are realistic, reasonable, and complete”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).