Randolph v. McCain

How courts have described this case

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

• relying solely upon 41 U.S.C. § 111 and declining to consider the FGCAA to determine jurisdiction
• “Whatever the agreements are called, the [c]ourt finds that [the agency]_was conducting a ‘procurement.’ ”
• “The [c]ourt finds that the definition [of procurement] set forth by the Federal Circuit is clear and it declines to adopt the extraneous limitations suggested by the Government.”
• “The definition of acquisition in [section] 131 explicitly provides that it only applies to Division B and therefore it does not apply to [section] 111 in Division A”
• “[W]here an agency has a statutory mandate to provide a service, and the agency decides to use a cooperative agreement ..., that agency has engaged in a procurement process under the Tucker Aet[.]”
• “[A] key inquiry [into the procurement/cooperative agreement distinction] is whether the agency’s focus is on providing a service to the ultimate beneficiaries [i.e., a procurement] or on assisting the intermediaries in providing a service [i.e., a cooperative agreement].”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).