48 C.F.R. § 3.104

3.104 Procurement integrity.

Read at: eCFRecfr.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov CasesGoogle Scholar
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 6 cases, 2005–2019 · leading case: FFTF Restoration Co. v. United States, 86 Fed. Cl. 226 (Fed. Cl. 2009).
FFTF Restoration Co. v. United States, 86 Fed. Cl. 226 (Fed. Cl. 2009). “104, 48 C.F.R. § 3.104 (2004) (“Procurement integrity”); see also, e.”
Res Rei Dev., Inc. v. United States, 126 Fed. Cl. 535 (Fed. Cl. 2016). “at 36-37 (citing 48 C.F.R. § 3.104 ; 41 U.S.C. § 2102 (a)(1)).”
Gulf Grp. Gen. Enter. Co. W.L.L. v. United States, 98 Fed. Cl. 639 (Fed. Cl. 2011). “§ 423 (2006) ("Restrictions on disclosing and obtaining contractor bid or proposal information or source selection information”), and implementing regulations at 48 C.F.R. § 3.104 (2010) ("Procurement integrity.”
MTB Grp., Inc. v. United States, 65 Fed. Cl. 516 (Fed. Cl. 2005). “§ 423 (a)(1) in its prohibition that “no person or other entity may disclose contractor bid or proposal information or source selection information to any person other than a person authorized!)]” 48 C.F.R. § 3.104 ^(e) is akin to the exemptions provided under 41.”
Citizens for Responsibility & Ethics in Wash. v. U.S. Gen. Servs. Admin., 358 F. Supp. 3d 50 (D.C. Cir. 2019). · cites it 2× “320 (providing that appraisals should be kept confidential) and 48 C.F.R § 3.104 (e) (providing that offerors' bid information relating to federal procurement project should be kept confidential).”
Citizens for Responsibility & Ethics in Washington v. Gen. Servs. Admin. (D.D.C. 2019). · cites it 2× “” 48 C.F.R. § 3.104 (e). The swap-relocation procurement has been canceled, and the bid information contained in the F&D pertained only to that project.”
— 48 C.F.R. § 3.104(e) — 1 case
Citizens for Responsibility & Ethics in Washington v. Gen. Servs. Admin. (D.D.C. 2019). “” 48 C.F.R. § 3.104 (e). The swap-relocation procurement has been canceled, and the bid information contained in the F&D pertained only to that project.”
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.