10 U.S.C. § 2305a

Renumbered § 3241]

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 10 CasesGoogle Scholar

[renumbered]

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 5 cases, 1991–2015 · leading case: CBY Design Builders v. United States, 105 Fed. Cl. 303 (Fed. Cl. 2012).
CBY Design Builders v. United States, 105 Fed. Cl. 303 (Fed. Cl. 2012). · cites it 2× “First, plaintiff has identified nothing in the design-build statute, see 10 U.S.C. § 2305a, or the FAR provisions implementing it, see 48 C.”
Info. Tech. & Applications Corp. v. United States, 51 Fed. Cl. 340 (Fed. Cl. 2001). “10 U.S.C. § 2305a(2)(A) (1994); FAR § 15.”
Tyler Constr. Grp. v. United States, 83 Fed. Cl. 94 (Fed. Cl. 2008). · cites it 6× “Plaintiff maintains that the governing statute, 10 U.S.C. § 2305a (2006), which authorizes the use of a two-phase selection procedure (i.”
Newport News Shipbuilding & Dry Dock Co. v. United States Dep't of the Navy, 771 F. Supp. 739 (E.D. Va. 1991). · cites it 4× “10 U.S.C. § 2305a. 3 The Seawolf program is such a major acquisition, and the Appropriations Act itself refers to the acquisition strategy.”
Acc Constr. Co., Inc. v. United States, 122 Fed. Cl. 663 (Fed. Cl. 2015). “10 U.S.C. § 2305a(e)(l)-(3) (emphasis supplied).”
— 10 U.S.C. § 2305a(2)(A) — 1 case
Info. Tech. & Applications Corp. v. United States, 51 Fed. Cl. 340 (Fed. Cl. 2001). “10 U.S.C. § 2305a(2)(A) (1994); FAR § 15.”
— 10 U.S.C. § 2305a(b) — 1 case
Tyler Constr. Grp. v. United States, 83 Fed. Cl. 94 (Fed. Cl. 2008). “Plaintiff maintains that the governing statute, 10 U.S.C. § 2305a (2006), which authorizes the use of a two-phase selection procedure (i.”
— 10 U.S.C. § 2305a(c)(2) — 1 case
CBY Design Builders v. United States, 105 Fed. Cl. 303 (Fed. Cl. 2012). “First, plaintiff has identified nothing in the design-build statute, see 10 U.S.C. § 2305a, or the FAR provisions implementing it, see 48 C.”
— 10 U.S.C. § 2305a(e)(l) — 1 case
Acc Constr. Co., Inc. v. United States, 122 Fed. Cl. 663 (Fed. Cl. 2015). “10 U.S.C. § 2305a(e)(l)-(3) (emphasis supplied).”
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.