Stanley v. Airgas-Southwest, Inc.

How courts have described this case

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

• recognizing that the “harm[ ] by having to undergo a recompetition” is not as severe as “hav[ing] been unfairly denied a meaningful opportunity to compete” and that “injunctive relief is warranted to remedy the unfair process”
• finding error in the Air Force’s decision to modify a solicitation requirement for the successful offeror after twice rejecting the protester’s request for the same modification
• “This Court’s bid protest jurisdiction is no longer premised on the theory of the breach of an implied-in-fact contract.”
• “Plaintiff has shown that granting a permanent injunction will serve the public interest by ensuring that the selection process under this Solicitation is conducted fairly [and] public confidence in that process will be preserved.”
• “[An] agency’s failure to follow the terms of its own [solicitation and selection of an offer- or based upon different requirements than those imposed upon the only other offeror are quintessential examples of conduct which lacks a rational basis.”
• “As the Federal Circuit recognized, ‘[t]he government is said to breach the implied contract if its consideration of offers is found to be arbitrary and capricious toward the bidder-claimant.’ ” (quoting Southfork Sys., Inc. v. United States, 141 F.3d 1124, 1132 (Fed.Cir.1998

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).