6 canonical passages across 3 cases, quoted by 220 opinions in total. These passages cluster together because the same opinions keep quoting them side by side — they state parts of one doctrine. The anchor passage is from Alabama Aircraft Industries, Inc.—Birmingham v. United States.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Alabama Aircraft Industries, Inc.—Birmingham v. United States Anchor | green | “entirely failed to consider an important aspect of the problem, offered an explanation for its decision that runs counter to the evidence before the agency, or the decision is so implausible that it could not be ascribed to a difference in view or the product of agency expertise.” | 54 |
| 2 | Bannum, Inc. v. United States | green | “paper record, allowing fact-finding by the trial court.” | 54 |
| 3 | Bannum, Inc. v. United States | green | “prejudice is a question of fact.” | 41 |
| 4 | Advanced Data Concepts, Incorporated v. United States | green | “the arbitrary and capricious standard applicable in bid protests is highly deferential.” | 28 |
| 5 | Alabama Aircraft Industries, Inc.—Birmingham v. United States | green | “when the agency 'entirely failed to consider an important aspect of the problem, offered an explanation for its decision that runs counter to the evidence before the agency, or the decision is so implausible that it could not be ascribed to a difference in view or the product of…” | 23 |
| 6 | Alabama Aircraft Industries, Inc.—Birmingham v. United States | green | “courts have found an agency's decision to be arbitrary and capricious when the agency 'entirely failed to consider an important aspect of the problem, offered an explanation for its decision that runs counter to the evidence before the agency, or the decision is so implausible t…” | 20 |
A red or yellow flag on a member means the underlying case has negative treatment — for those, check the case page before relying on the passage.