Case law

Fifth Third Bank v. United States

52 Fed. Cl. 202 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Mar 29, 2002

United States, 124 F.3d 1269, 1273 (Fed.Cir.1997), but must fall within a class clearly intended to be directly benefitted thereby. … Miller, which is to establish the existence of a third-party beneficiary to that contract.

Gramza v. Secretary of Health and Human Services

United States Court of Federal Claims · Apr 2, 2018

furnished by that party: (1) that is a trade secret or commercial or financial in substance and is privileged or confidential; or (2) that includes medical files or similar files, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly … Gramza experienced immune thrombocytopenic purpura (“ITP”).4 Petition at 1, 6.

Moriarty v. Secretary of Health and Human Services

United States Court of Federal Claims · Sep 27, 2016

MacDonald stated that most of his patients have suffered from either lupus or another immune-based disease, such as acquired immune deficiency syndrome. Tr. 276, 279. … Thus, the undersigned’s conclusion — again made without expert assistance — is that Eilise does not qualify as “probable autoimmune encephalitis.”

Grossmann v. Secretary of Health and Human Services

United States Court of Federal Claims · Mar 15, 2022

Trollmo et al., Intra-articular immunization induces strong systemic immune response in humans, 82 IMMUNOLOGY 384 (1990) (Ex. 32.)) Dr. … Thus, it is important to have a definition of SIRVA that is clearly associated with vaccine injection.

Council for Tribal Employment Rights v. United States

112 Fed. Cl. 231 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Aug 27, 2013

Moreover, for the purpose of the court’s jurisdictional inquiry, the Council also qualifies as a “contractor” under the CDA. … Because Indian tribes possess sovereign immunity, joinder of a tribe is not feasible unless the tribe waives its immunity or the suit is authorized by Congress. See Oklahoma Tax Comm’n. v.

ATA Defense Industries, Inc. v. United States

41 Cont. Cas. Fed. 77,147 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Jun 27, 1997

Neither the agencies nor the courts can unilaterally create exceptions to the clear mandate that Congress has established. C. … Next, defendant argues that the FSS-eovered portion of the disputed contract was clearly within the contracting officer’s discretion and hence, that any injunction should address only the approximate 35 percent of the contract

Barzillai v. United States

United States Court of Federal Claims · Apr 30, 2018

In addition, “[t]he United States is immune from suit unless it has specifically waived sovereign immunity.” 9/18/17 Gov’t Mot. at 16 (citing United States v. … To establish standing, the March 15, 2017 Complaint also must “clearly . . . allege facts demonstrating” that Plaintiff’s injury is “fairly traceable to the challenged action of the [Government].”

K.L. v. Secretary of the Department of Health & Human Services

134 Fed. Cl. 579 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Aug 8, 2017

claim, a petitioner must satisfy all three of the elements established by the Federal Circuit in Althen.” … Engstrand to even testify concerning her medical theory because she did not have ‘specialized expertise in the condition of epilepsy’ even though she is a highly qualified and experienced neurologist.”

Angelica Textile Services, Inc. v. United States

95 Fed. Cl. 208 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Oct 26, 2010

To implement the Veterans Benefits Act, the Department established the “Veterans First Contracting Program” on June 20, 2007. … To establish standing in a bid protest action in this court, a petitioner must be an “interested party.” 28 U.S.C. 1491(b)(1).

Information Sciences Corp. v. United States

86 Fed. Cl. 269 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Mar 31, 2009

The words ‘that action’ clearly refer to the preceding language in the EAJA reciting the ‘civil action ... brought by or against the United States.’ ”). … Nash, Discussions After Establishing The Competitive Range: Are They Mandatory?

Solaria Corporation v. United States

123 Fed. Cl. 105 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Sep 1, 2015

Any financial injury established by Plaintiffs also can be redressed by a monetary award. … And, the interest payments are clearly property. Pl. Resp. at 10–11.12 iii. The Court’s Resolution.

Columbus Regional Hospital v. United States

United States Court of Federal Claims · Oct 10, 2019

Privity is established when “(1) the prime contractor was acting as a purchasing agent for the government; (2) the agency relationship between the prime contractor and the government was established by clear contractual consent … The Agreement did not create the kind of “direct, unavoidable contractual liability” from FEMA to the Hospital “that establishes privity and thereby waives sovereign immunity.”

Johnson v. United States

97 Fed. Cl. 267 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Mar 24, 2011

He voluntarily left the Navy two years before he would have qualified for permanent retirement and disability benefits. In May 2005, Mr. Johnson applied to the BCNR for correction of his military record. Mr. … Johnson had not submitted sufficient evidence to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice, which would require correction and modification of his military record. Id. at 120-21 .

Vernacchio v. Secretary of Health and Human Services

United States Court of Federal Claims · Jul 13, 2016

In a typical immune response, he explained, cells produce antibodies in reaction to the viral or bacterial invader. Tr. at 301, 405. … Petitioners Did Not Establish a Medically Reasonable Timeframe.

Wolcott v. United States

43 Fed. Cl. 581 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Apr 27, 1999

The individual claimants, therefore, must look beyond the jurisdictional statute for a waiver of sovereign immunity. United States v. Testan, 424 U.S. at 398 , 96 S.Ct. 948 . … The Smithsonian Staff Handbook clearly states that trust fund employees such as the plaintiffs “are employees paid from trust funds and appointed under the provisions of trust fund personnel policies.”

Etchegoinberry v. United States

United States Court of Federal Claims · May 19, 2023

Because a waiver of sovereign immunity is to be “strictly construed, in terms of its scope, in favor of the sovereign,” Lane v. … Cir. 1988) (“[Plaintiffs] bear[] the burden of establishing subject matter jurisdiction by a preponderance of the evidence.”).

Montero v. United States

United States Court of Federal Claims · Aug 26, 2022

Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit has clearly stated, this Court does not have jurisdiction over a Fifth Amendment taking claim based on the federal government’s in rem forfeiture of property when the plaintiff could … Additionally, under the “evidence test,” the same facts and evidence must be used in both cases to establish Plaintiff’s ownership interest in the property.

Doyle v. Secretary of Health and Human Services

United States Court of Federal Claims · Oct 12, 2021

However, immunization illnesses like neuropathy can occur.” Id. at 2. III. … Brown further opined that Petitioner “had an inflammatory reaction after the immunization. Id. at 5.

Stacy v. Secretary of Health and Human Services

United States Court of Federal Claims · Sep 3, 2024

Steinman emphasized his view that Gautam clearly established that a homologic sequence of just four or five amino acids would be enough for a mimicking cross-reaction to occur. Tr. at 100. … Nor is it enough to offer an opinion from a generally- qualified expert, like Dr. Steinman, 13 and then assume causation has been established. I am not compelled to accept his opinion merely upon its utterance.

American Innotek, Inc. v. United States

113 Fed. Cl. 668 · United States Court of Federal Claims · May 24, 2013

JWOD established the Committee for Purchase from People Who Are Blind or Severely Disabled (“the Committee”), an independent federal agency, to facilitate the Government’s “purchase of commodities and services from qualified … The Committee maintains a procurement list of supplies and services that must be purchased from “any qualified nonprofit agency for the blind or by any qualified nonprofit agency for other severely handicapped.” 41 U.S.C.