U.S. Code » Title 41 » Subtitle Subtitle I— Federal Procurement Policy › Division Division A— General › Chapter CHAPTER 1— DEFINITIONS › Subchapter SUBCHAPTER I— SUBTITLE DEFINITIONS

41 U.S.C. § 111

Procurement

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 41 CasesGoogle Scholar

In this subtitle, the term “procurement” includes all stages of the process of acquiring property or services, beginning with the process for determining a need for property or services and ending with contract completion and closeout.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 58 cases (12 in the last 5 years), 2011–2026 · leading case: Hymas v. United States, 810 F.3d 1312 (Fed. Cir. 2016).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Hymas v. United States, 810 F.3d 1312 (Fed. Cir. 2016). · cites it 31× “3 , 41 U.S.C. § 111 , 124 Stat. 3677 , 3681 (2011).”
Hymas v. United States, 117 Fed. Cl. 466 (Fed. Cl. 2014). · cites it 9× “2008) (applying the definition of “procurement” as “acquiring property or services” found in 41 U.S.C. § 111 [formerly § 403] to 28 U.”
Nat'l Air Cargo Grp., Inc. v. United States, 126 Fed. Cl. 281 (Fed. Cl. 2016). · cites it 3× “” 41 U.S.C. § 111 (defining “procurement”); Distributed Solutions, 539 F.”
360Training.com, Inc. v. United States, 104 Fed. Cl. 575 (Fed. Cl. 2012). · cites it 6× “§ 403 (2), which has been reorga *582 nized into 41 U.S.C. § 111 . 4 Distributed Solutions, Inc.”
AgustaWestland North Am., Inc. v. United States, 880 F.3d 1326 (Fed. Cir. 2018). “In 2011, § 403(2) was recodified át 41 U.S.C. § 111 .”
Validata Chem. Servs. v. United States Dep't of Energy, 169 F. Supp. 3d 69 (D.D.C. 2016). · cites it 2× “The government argues that the definition of “procurement” contained in 41 U.S.C. § 111 and adopted by the Federal Circuit with respect to ADRA shows that Validata’s attack on the UCOR subcontract is not “in connection with” a “procurement.”
Eco Tour Adventures, Inc. v. United States, 114 Fed. Cl. 6 (Fed. Cl. 2013). · cites it 2× “§ 403 (2), which has been reorganized into 41 U.S.C. § 111 (Supp. V 2011). Resource Conservation, 597 F.”
Coast Prof'l, Inc. v. United States, 828 F.3d 1349 (Fed. Cir. 2016). “And we have interpreted "in connection with a procurement or proposed procurement” as “involv[ing] a connection with any stage of the federal contracting acquisition process, including the process for determining a need for property or services,” based on the definition provided…”
percipient.ai, Inc. v. United States, 104 F.4th 839 (Fed. Cir. 2024). · cites it 2× “§ 403 (2) was recodified at 41 U.S.C. § 111 . Case: 23-1970 Document: 46 Page: 18 Filed: 06/07/2024 18 PERCIPIENT.”
Fisher-Cal Indus., Inc. v. United States, 747 F.3d 899 (D.C. Cir. 2014). · cites it 3× “” The district court went on to note that although the Tucker Act does not define “procurement,” the relevant definition of the term was to be found in 41 U.S.C. § 111 , which states that “procurement” includes “all stages of the process of acquiring property or sendees,…”
Elmendorf Support Servs. Jt. Venture v. United States, 105 Fed. Cl. 203 (Fed. Cl. 2012). · cites it 2× “§ 403 (2) (recodified at 41 U.S.C. § 111 ), which relates to the creation of the Office of Federal Procurement Policy.”
Palantir Usg, Inc. v. United States, 129 Fed. Cl. 218 (Fed. Cl. 2016). “§ 111 (2012)) (“[T]he term ‘procurement’ is itself broad, meaning ‘all stages of the process of acquiring property or services, beginning with the process for determining a need for property or services and ending with contract completion and closeout.”
Show all 58 citing cases →
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.