Legal Opinion
E.W. Bliss Co. v. United States
United States Court of Federal Claims
Decided March 31, 1995No. 94-371CPublishedCited by 27 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
MILLER, Judge.
This suit to recover costs incurred in preparing technical and cost proposals is before the court after argument on cross-motions for summary judgment.2 The issue for resolution is whether the Government’s award of a contract to an offeror other than plaintiff was arbitrary and capricious because, inter alia, the procuring agency accepted an allegedly non-responsive technical proposal.
FACTS
The following facts are undisputed, unless otherwise noted. On July 28,1993, the United States Department of the Treasury, Unit*126ed States Mint (the “Mint”), issued Request for Proposals…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- M. Steinthal & Co., Inc. v. Robert J. Seamans, Jr., Secretary of the Air Force, Pioneer Parachute Co., Inc.Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1971
- Honeywell, Inc. v. The United States v. Haz-Tad, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1989
- United States, Appellant/cross-Appellee v. John C. Grimberg Co., Inc. And W.M. Schlosser Co., Inc., Appellees/cross-AppellantsCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1983
- Keco Industries, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1974
- Torncello v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1982
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by27 opinions
- E.W. Bliss Company v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1996
- Metcalf Construction Co. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2002
- Worldtravelservice v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2001
- JWK International Corp. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2002
- Caddell Construction Co., Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2013
22 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.