48 C.F.R. § 19.303
19.303 [Reserved]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 14
cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1991–2021 · leading case: Rotech Healthcare Inc. v. United States
Rotech Healthcare Inc. v. United States (2006)
“402(c); 48 C.F.R. § 19.303 (c) (2005). A challenge to an agency’s assignment of a particular NAICS code to a procurement must be served and filed on the SBA within ten calendar days after the solicitation is issued.”
Adams and Associates, Inc. v. United States (2013)
“See 48 C.F.R. § 19.303 (a) (2012); AR 1, 3. Each industry category is assigned a code through the North American Industry Classification System (“NAICS”) maintained by the Office of Management and Budget (“OMB”).”
Ceres Environmental Services, Inc. v. United States (2002)
“; 48 C.F.R. § 19.303 (a). 2 In making this determination, primary consideration is given to the industry description in the NAICS United States Manual (“NAICS Manual”), the product or service description in the solicitation and any attachments to it, the relative value and…”
Dynamic Educational Systems, Inc. v. United States (2013)
“See 48 C.F.R. § 19.303 (a) (2012); AR 1, 64, 69.”
Advanced Systems Technology, Inc. v. United States (2006)
“402 (b); 48 C.F.R. § 19.303 . SBA regulation 13 C.”
Red River Service Corp. v. United States (2004)
“102 ; 48 C.F.R. § 19.303 (a). . The Administrative Record is "not a documentary record maintained contemporaneously with the events or actions included in it.”
Rlb Contracting, Inc. v. United States (2014)
“” 48 C.F.R. § 19.303 (a)(2) (2014). II. The Parties’ Arguments Plaintiff argues that the agency and OHA erred in failing to give meaningful consideration to which items of work will require dredging and whether that work makes up “the greatest percentage of contract value.”
B & B Medical Services, Inc. v. United States (2014)
“See 48 C.F.R. § 19.303 (c)(5). If there were any doubts as to the agency’s intentions in this regard, they have been dispelled by the pre-solicitation notice, issued January 6, 2014, identifying the revised procurement as a total small business set-aside under NAICS code 532291.”
Ingenesis, Inc. v. United States (2012)
“402 (b)); see also 48 C.F.R. § 19.303 (a) (2011). Primary consideration is given to: the industry descriptions in the NAICS United States Manual, the product or service description in the solicitation and any attachments to it, the relative value and importance of the components…”
Ranger American of Puerto Rico, Inc. v. United States (2021)
“When the contracting officer selects “the appropriate NAICS code and related small business size standard and [includes it] in solicitations,” 48 C.F.R. § 19.303 (a), the effect is to incorporate a judgment made by the Small Business Administration as to what the appropriate 32…”
Ranger American of Puerto Rico, Inc. v. United States (2021)
“When the contracting officer selects “the appropriate NAICS code and related small business size standard and [includes it] in solicitations,” 48 C.F.R. § 19.303 (a), the effect is to incorporate a judgment made by the Small Business Administration as to what the appropriate 32…”
B&B Medical Services, Inc. v. United States (2014)
“See 48 C.F.R. § 19.303 (c)(5). If there were any doubts as to the agency’s intentions in this regard, they have been dispelled by the pre-solicitation notice, issued January 6, 2014, identifying the revised procurement as a total small business set-aside under NAICS code 532291.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.