Pai Corp. 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 disappointed bidder must point to “hard facts” to show that a CO’s decision was arbitrary
• stating that documentation is not required when the contracting officer determines that a conflict of interest is not significant
• stating that a plaintiffs first step toward prevailing in a bid protest is to demonstrate error
• stating that an agency’s action may also be arbitrary and capricious if “the procurement procedure involved a violation of regulation or procedure.”
• explaining that “[c]ontracting officers are entitled to exercise discretion upon a broad range of issues confronting them in the procurement process”
• stating that the issue is “whether the contracting officer failed to exercise proper discretion and to follow proper procedures in making the determination that no organizational conflict of interest existed”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).