Scrantom v. Masters

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that plaintiff could have objected to an amendment to “the solicitation during the bidding process, and in not doing so, waived its right to do so before this court”
• holding protestor waived its right to challenge a solicitation amendment by not objecting to its terms during the bidding process
• holding protestor waived its right to challenge a solicitation amendment by not objecting to its terms during the bidding process
• finding that plaintiff did not demonstrate prejudice in alleged errors in the IGE because the IGE was not the contracting officer’s sole basis for making a price reasonableness determination
• finding protestor lacked standing because protestor did not object to inclusion of terms in the solicitation concerning priority afforded to state licensing agencies under the Randolph-Shepard Act during bid period
• “While the GAO protest was ongoing ... [the contractor] continued to perform through a series of month long bridge contracts.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).