Legal Opinion
Process Control Technologies v. United States
United States Court of Federal Claims
Decided August 2, 2002No. 99-941 CPublishedCited by 17 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
*73OPINION
BUSH, Judge.
This pre-award bid protest is currently before the court on defendant’s motion for judgment upon the administrative record and plaintiffs opposition thereto. For the following reasons, defendant’s motion is granted.
BACKGROUND
I. Factual Background
On December 11, 1995, the United States Army, White Sands Missile Range (Army) issued Request for Proposals (RFP) No. DAAD07-96-R-0103 for the purchase of wire harness kits and test fixtures for the Flexible Engine Diagnostic System, a mobile testing facility used to test turbo-shaft engines. The requirement was offered to Process…
2Cases cited27 opinions
- Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, Administratrix of the Estate of CatrettSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Camp v. PittsSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
- Impresa Construzioni Geom. Domenico Garufi v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2001
- Mingus Constructors, Inc. v. The United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1987
22 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by17 opinions
- Banknote Corp. of America, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2003
- Westech International, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2007
- D & S Consultants, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2011
- ABF Freight System, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2003
- Bannum, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2003
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.