green
Positive treatment
Hot · 54 in 5y
Quoted verbatim 4×
61.4 score
“almost all of the skus and associated gsa prices listed on dell's bpa attachment 2 - bpa product and 38 price list were matched using this method to the gsa skus and prices on dell's consolidated microsoft products excel.”
Treatment trajectory · 2011 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
2011
2018
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 50 distinct citers.
discussed
Cited as authority (verbatim quote)
Cs 321 East 2nd Investors, LLC v. United States
the plaintiff must show that lacked a rational basis
discussed
Cited as authority (verbatim quote)
Hydraulics International, Inc. v. United States
(2×)
also: Cited as authority (rule)
where an offeror has certified that it meets the technical requirements of a proposal, the contracting officer is entitled to rely on such certification in determining whether to accept a bid . . . .
examined
Cited as authority (quoted)
Insight Public Sector, Inc. v. United States
(6×)
also: Cited as authority (rule), Cited "see"
almost all of the skus and associated gsa prices listed on dell's bpa attachment 2 - bpa product and 38 price list were matched using this method to the gsa skus and prices on dell's consolidated microsoft products excel.
discussed
Cited as authority (quoted)
Novak Birch, Inc. v. United States
(2×)
also: Cited as authority (rule)
f the court finds that both allied and monster were ineligible for award, doj would be obligated to resolicit the contract and allied could compete for the contract again.
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Sterling Medical Associates, Inc. v. United States
Grp., Inc. 6 v. United States, 649 F.3d 1320, 1326 (Fed.
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
Loyal Source Government Services, LLC v. United States
Grp., Inc. v. United States, 649 F.3d 1320, 1326 (Fed.
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
Loyal Source Government Services, LLC v. United States
Grp., Inc. v. United States, 649 F.3d 1320, 1326 (Fed.
examined
Cited as authority (rule)
Govwave, LLC v. United States
(3×)
Regarding materiality, the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit has held “‘a proposal that fails to conform to the material terms and conditions of the solicitation should be considered unacceptable and a contract award based on such an unacceptable proposal violates the procurement statutes and regulations.’” Allied Tech. 66 Grp., Inc. v. United States, 649 F.3d 1320, 1329 (Fed.
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Zin Technologies, Inc. v. United States
Grp., Inc. v. United States, 649 F.3d 1320, 1331 (Fed.
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Technatomy Corporation v. United States
“A pro- posal that fails to conform to the material terms and conditions of the solicitation should be con- sidered unacceptable.” Allied Technology Group, Inc. v. United States, 649 F.3d 1320, 1329-30 (Fed.
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
Aspire Therapy Services & Consultants, Inc. v. United States
Grp. v. United States, 649 F.3d 1320, 1329 (Fed.
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
Thalin, LLC v. United States
Grp., Inc. v. United States, 649 F3d 1320, 1329 (Fed.
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
Golden It, LLC. v. United States
Grp., Inc. v. United States, 649 F.3d 1320, 1326 (Fed.
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
Koam Engineering Services, Inc. v. United States
Grp., Inc. v. United States, 649 F.3d 1320, 1326 (Fed.
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
Coastal Environmental Group, Inc v. United States
Grp., Inc. v. United States, 649 F.3d 1320, 1326 (Fed.
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
NLMK Pennsylvania, LLC v. United States
Defendant 11 Form, Merriam-Webster’s Dictionary, available at https://www.merriam- webster.com/dictionary/form (last accessed Jan. 18, 2023) (defining “form” as “the shape and structure of something as distinguished from its material”); Fit, Merriam- Webster’s Dictionary, available at https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/fit (last accessed Jan. 18, 2023) (defining “fit” as “to conform to a particular shape or size”). 12 Commerce made this finding in all of its 2020 and 2021 denial letters, with the exception of the three requests which it deemed ambiguous (Exclusion R…
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Second Street Holdings LLC v. United States
Grp., Inc. v. United States, 649 F.3d 1320, 1330 (Fed.
examined
Cited as authority (rule)
Dolphin Park Tt, LLC v. United States
(5×)
also: Cited "see"
Grp., Inc. v. United States, 649 F.3d 1320, 1326 (Fed.
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Integrated Finance & Accounting Solutions, LLC v. United States
Grp., Inc. v. United States, 649 F.3d 1320, 1326 (Fed.
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
Ames 1, LLC v. United States
Grp., Inc. v. United States, 649 F.3d 1320, 1326 (Fed.
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Frawner Corporation v. United States
(2×)
Grp., Inc. v. United States, 649 F.3d 1320, 1326 (Fed.
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
Elevated Technologies, Inc. v. United States
Grp., Inc. v. United States, 649 F.3d 1320, 1329 (Fed.
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
Newimar, S.A. v. United States
Grp., Inc. v. United States, 649 F.3d 1320, 1326 (Fed.
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
Englobal Government Services, Inc. v. United States
Grp., 649 F.3d at 1326 (alteration in original) (quoting Statistica, Inc. v. Christopher, 102 F.3d 1577, 1581 (Fed.
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
Seventh Dimension, LLC v. United States
Grp., Inc. v. United States, 649 F.3d 1320, 1326 (Fed.
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Thalle Construction Co. Inc. v. United States
(2×)
Grp., Inc. v. United States, 649 F.3d 1320, 1327-28 (Fed.
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Thalle Construction Co. Inc. v. United States
(2×)
Grp., Inc. v. United States, 649 F.3d 1320, 1327-28 (Fed.
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
Iap Worldwide Services, Inc. v. United States
Grp., Inc. v. United States, 649 F.3d 1320, 1326 (Fed.
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
Mitchco International, Inc. v. United States
Grp., Inc. v. United States, 649 F.3d 1320, 1330 (Fed.
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
Mitchco International, Inc. v. United States
Grp., Inc. v. United States, 649 F.3d 1320, 1330 (Fed.
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Golden It, LLC v. United States
(2×)
Grp., Inc. v. United States, 649 F.3d 1320, 1326 (Fed.
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Golden It, LLC v. United States
(2×)
Grp., Inc. v. United States, 649 F.3d 1320, 1326 (Fed.
examined
Cited as authority (rule)
Agile-Bot II, LLC v. United States
(3×)
Grp., Inc. v. United States, 649 F.3d 1320, 1326 (Fed.
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Oak Grove Technologies, LLC v. United States
(2×)
Grp., Inc. v. United States, 649 F.3d 1320, 1326 (Fed.
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
American K-9 Detection Services, LLC v. United States
Grp., Inc. v. United States, 649 F.3d 1320, 1329 (Fed.
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
Asset Protection & Security v. United States
Grp. v. United States, 649 F.3d 1320, 1329 (Fed.
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
Wavelink, Inc v. United States
Grp., Inc. v. United States, 649 F.3d 1320, 1326 (Fed.
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Harmonia Holdings Group, LLC v. United States
(2×)
Grp., Inc. v. United States, 649 F.3d 1320, 1330 (Fed.
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
Mortgage Contracting Services, LLC v. United States
Grp., Inc. v. United States, 649 F.3d 1320, 1326 (Fed.
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
Agma Security Service, Inc. v. United States
Grp., Inc. v. United States, 649 F.3d 1320, 1326 (Fed.
examined
Cited as authority (rule)
Huffman Building P, LLC v. United States
(3×)
Grp., Inc. v. United States, 649 F.3d 1320, 1330 (Fed.
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Iap World Services, Inc. v. United States
Grp., Inc. v. United States, 649 F.3d 1320, 1326 (Fed.
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
Agma Security Service, Inc. v. United States
Grp., Inc. v. United States, 649 F.3d 1320, 1326 (Fed.
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Vertex Aerospace, LLC. v. United States
(2×)
also: Cited "see"
Group, Inc. v. United States, 649 F.3d 1320, 1330-31 (Fed.
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
Asset Protection & Security Services, L.P. v. United States
Grp., Inc. v. United States, 649 F.3d 1320, 1329 (Fed.
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
Hvf West, LLC v. United States
Grp., Inc. v. United States, 649 F.3d 1320, 1326 (Fed.
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
Harmonia Holdings Group, LLC v. United States
Grp., Inc. v. United States, 649 F.3d 1320, 1326 (Fed.
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
Veteran Shredding, LLC v. United States
Grp., Inc. v. United States, 649 F.3d 1320, 1326 (Fed.
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
Safeguard Base Operations, LLC v. United States
Grp., Inc. v. United States, 649 F.3d 1320, 1326 (Fed.
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Chenega Healthcare Services, LLC v. United States
Grp., Inc. v. United States, 649 F.3d 1320, 1327-29 (Fed.
Allied Technology Group, Inc.
v.
United States
v.
United States
2010-5131.
Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit.
Sep 10, 2010.
Unpublished
Citer courts: Federal Claims (2)
NOTE: This order is nonprecedential United States Court of AppeaIs for the Federal Circuit ALLIED TECI-INOLOGY GROUP, INC., Plaintiff-Appellan,t, V. UNITED STATES, Defendant-Appellee, AND MONSTER GOVERNMENT SOLUTIONS, LLC, Defendant-Appellee. 2010-5131 Appea1 from the United States Court of Federal Claims in case no. 10-CV-120, Judge Th0mas C. Whee1er. ON MOTION ORDER Upon consideration of M0nster Govern1:nent So1utions, LLC’s unopposed motion to add Wi11ia1n M. Jack to the trial c0urt’S protective order, IT ls 0RDERE1) THAT:
ALLIED TECHNOLOGY GROUP V. US 2 The motion is granted FOR TH1: COURT t 3EP 1 own 131 Jan H0rba1y Date J an Horba1y Clerk ccc Frederick W. C1aybr0ok, Jr., Esq. Jacob B. PankoWski, Esq. MichaeI N. O’Connel1, Jr., Esq. 519 U.S. O0UR1':!i|)ll?E\PPEALS FOR THE FEDERAL C|RCU|T SEP 10 2010 JAN HORBALY CLERK