Innovation Development Enterprises of America, 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 the “[f]ailure to account for transition periods between an incumbent contractor and a new contractor is . . . [a] form of lack of advanced planning”
• holding that the “[f]ailure to account for transition periods between an incumbent contractor and a new contractor is . . . a form of lack of advanced planning”
• ruling that a protestor had standing to challenge a sole-source procurement because it had a substantial chance of a contractual award but for the agency’s decision to limit competition
• holding that the Air Force’s sole-source award was arbitrary and capricious because, among other reasons, the J&A rested on factual conclusions that were unexplained and unsupported by the record
• finding that the plaintiffs re quests for injunctive relief were moot because the contract had been fully performed
• “[T]his standard requires only that a protestor’s chance of award ‘must not have been insubstantial.’”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).