Skip to main content
Federal Circuit· 8/24/2012

Systems Application & Technologies, Inc. v. United States

Citations

  • 691 F.3d 1374
  • 2012 WL 3631249
  • 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 18031

How courts have described this case

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

  • holding that it is “clear” that “bid protest jurisdiction arises when an agency decides to take corrective action”
  • holding that the contractor had standing to bring a pre-award bid protest because costs associated with rebidding on the contract amounted to an injury
  • holding that the Court of Federal Claims had jurisdiction under § 1491(b)(1) because \[the plaintiff]'s complaint specifically challenged the [agency]'s announced decision to amend or revise the solicitation-an unambiguous objection 'to a solicitation' \ under § 1491(b)(1
  • explaining that the Tucker Act expressly waives sovereign immunity for claims against the United States in bid protests
  • explaining that the Tucker Act expressly waives sovereign immunity for claims against the United States in bid protests
  • explaining that the Tucker Act expressly waives sovereign immunity for claims against the United States in bid protests

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Rader, O'Malley, Wallach

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

229 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

25 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Other cases named Systems Application & Technologies, Inc. v. United States

2 other CourtListener records share this case name.

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.