Filtration Development Co., LLC v. United States
United States Court of Federal Claims
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION and ORDER
FUTEY, Judge.
This matter in a bid protest case is before the court on plaintiffs application for attorney fees and expenses pursuant to the Equal Access to Justice Act (EAJA). The parties’ arguments in these proceedings closely trace the EAJA’s statutory requirements and are directed toward entitlement as well as quantum. Defendant maintains that plaintiffs application was untimely and should be denied solely on that basis. The parties dispute whether plaintiff can properly be characterized as a prevailing party. The parties contest whether defendant’s position, both at the…
2Cases cited48 opinions
- Hensley v. EckerhartSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
- Pierce v. UnderwoodSupreme Court of the United States · 1988
- Alyeska Pipeline Service Co. v. Wilderness SocietySupreme Court of the United States · 1975
- Buckhannon Board & Care Home, Inc. v. West Virginia Dept. of Health and Human ResourcesSupreme Court of the United States · 2001
- Farrar v. HobbySupreme Court of the United States · 1992
43 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by15 opinions
- Rodriguez ex rel. Estate of Rodriguez v. Secretary of Health & Human ServicesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2010
- CEMS, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2005
- Geo-Seis Helicopters, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2007
- Chapman Law Firm Co. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2005
- United Partition Systems, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2010
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.