10 U.S.C. § 2382
Repealed. Pub. L. 112–239, div. A, title XVI, § 1671(c)(1), Jan. 2, 2013, 126 Stat. 2084]
[repealed]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 5
cases, 1978–2016 · leading case: Tyler Constr. Grp. v. United States, 570 F.3d 1329 (Fed. Cir. 2009).
Tyler Constr. Grp. v. United States, 570 F.3d 1329 (Fed. Cir. 2009). “§ 631 (j)(3), which requires “each Federal agency” to “avoid unnecessary and unjustified bundling of contract requirements that precludes small business participation in procurements as prime contractors,” and the similar limitation on “consolidation” of procurement in 10 U.S.C.…”
Tyler Constr. Grp. v. United States, 83 Fed. Cl. 94 (Fed. Cl. 2008). “§§ 631 (j), 644, and 10 U.S.C. § 2382 (a) (2006), each of which addresses the importance of safeguarding the opportunity for small businesses to participate in government procurements and the need to confine the use of contracts that involve so-called bundling or consolidation…”
Palantir Usg, Inc. v. United States, 129 Fed. Cl. 218 (Fed. Cl. 2016). “§ 631 (j)(3), which requires ‘each Federal agency’ to ‘avoid unnecessary and unjustified bundling of contract requirements that precludes small business participation in procurements as prime contractors,’ and the similar limitation on ‘consolidation’ of procurement in 10 U.S.C.…”
Grumman Aerospace Corp. v. United States, 217 Ct. Cl. 285 (Ct. Cl. 1978). “397, governing cost computations under the Vinson-Trammell Act which limited profits on certain war and defense items (now 10 U.S.C. §§2382 , 7300 (1970)). At that time and for many years thereafter, the normal and usual understanding of a "claim against the Government” was a…”
Rainbow Navigation, Inc. v. Dep't of the Navy, 620 F. Supp. 534 (D.D.C. 1985). “” 10 U.S.C. § 2382 (a)(3). 19 . The plaintiff argues that the legislative history indicates that Congress meant that the rates had to be "exorbitant” or constitute "extortion” —a much higher standard than only allowing a “fair profit" to ship owners, as the government contends.”
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.