Vance v. City of Birmingham

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that Congress intended the court’s definition of interested party to follow the GAO statute’s definition
• explaining that the ADRA’s reference to the APA concerned section 706, which contains the standard of review, and not section 702, which pertains to standing
• dismissing protest over alleged improper “bundling” in solicitation for lack of standing that was filed after proposal period
• “[Cjonclusory allegations unsupported by any factual assertions will not withstand a motion to dismiss.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).