Case law

Pentcholov v. Secretary of Health and Human Services

United States Court of Federal Claims · Jun 8, 2016

That rate is in turn determined 4 by the “forum rule,” which bases the award rate on rates paid to similarly qualified attorneys in the forum in which the relevant court … In all stages of the lodestar calculation, I must determine if the fees applicant has established the reasonableness of the billing rate and work performed. Mares v.

IMS Services, Inc. v. United States

40 Cont. Cas. Fed. 76,784 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Feb 14, 1995

All the other offerors qualified as being in the competitive range had used the MET cost estimates calculated and supplied by the Navy in the solicitation documents, including the plaintiff. … Because the FAR provision clearly was violated here, the Board look to Logicon, Inc. v.

Demko v. United States

44 Fed. Cl. 83 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Jun 18, 1999

974 (Fed.Cir.1997) (“[W]here Congress uses terms that have accumulated settled meaning under either equity or common law, a court must infer, unless the statute otherwise dictates, that Congress means to incorporate the established … United States, 179 Ct.Cl. 466, 470-71 , 373 F.2d 920, 922 (1967) (finding liberal delegation constitutional because “policy of the statutory provision is clearly apparent, the Con *94 gress has delineated the public agency

Hassay v. United States

United States Court of Federal Claims · Jan 27, 2025

The Board concluded, however, that “the objective contemporary evidence overwhelmingly established that [Mr. … Cir. 1988) (observing that the six-year limitations period “is a jurisdictional requirement attached by Congress as a condition of the government’s waiver of sovereign immunity and, as such, must be strictly construed”).

Corrigan v. United States

82 Fed. Cl. 301 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Jun 18, 2008

To qualify, the defense “has to be clearly indicated and must appear on the face of the pleading to be used as the basis for the motion.” Id.; see also Richmond, Fredericksburg & Potomac R.R. Co. v. … By affording a claimant only one opportunity to obtain redress, the doctrine conserves judicial resources, fosters reliance upon judicial decisions, immunizes against the possibility of inconsistent decisions, and protects

S. v. Secretary of Health and Human Services

United States Court of Federal Claims · Feb 9, 2026

dysregulation of the immune response to continue or expand. … In attempting to establish entitlement to a Vaccine Program award of compensation for a Non-Table claim, a petitioner must satisfy all three of the elements established by the Federal Circuit in Althen v.

Signet Technologies, Inc. v. United States

United States Court of Federal Claims · Jun 30, 2021

established,” (AR 285), and (6) “address each team member’s responsibilities and performance requirements so that liability is clearly established[.]” … That element states as follows: “The CTA document must address each team member’s responsibilities and performance requirements so that liability is clearly established.” (AR Tab 9 at 284).

Moreno v. United States

82 Fed. Cl. 387 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Jul 3, 2008

In addition, 5 C.F.R. § 610.111 (a)(2) (2000) requires that “[t]he head of each agency ... shall establish ... … Here, by contrast, the plaintiffs clearly could have sued any time after the pay periods during which they worked a sixth day per week at FLETC but did not receive overtime for it.

Roth v. United States

56 Fed. Cl. 239 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Apr 15, 2003

But clearly, pursuant to note 7, the AFBCMR has discretion respecting the language that may be used. … Clearly plaintiff’s words were indicative of righteous indignation.

Old Stone Corp. v. United States

63 Fed. Cl. 65 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Nov 18, 2004

Yet, “ ‘[i]f a reasonable probability of damage can be clearly established, uncertainty as to the amount will not preclude recovery,’ and the court’s duty is to ‘make a fair and x-easonable approximation of damages.’ ” Bluebonnet … Some damages are too attenuated or too speculative to qualify for award, however. The non-breaching party is entitled only to damages that are foreseeable. Hadley v.

Facility Healthcare Services, Inc. v. United States

United States Court of Federal Claims · Feb 10, 2022

Clearly, Plaintiff is an actual bidder for this contract. Weeks Marine, Inc. v. United States, 575 F.3d 1352, 1359 (Fed. … Cl. at 439 (determining that advisement that an offeror’s prices were “way too high” was sufficient to qualify as meaningful and fair discussions).

Mexican Intermodal Equipment S.A. de C.V. v. United States

61 Fed. Cl. 55 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Jun 10, 2004

Once jurisdiction is challenged by the court or the opposing party, the plaintiff bears the burden of establishing jurisdiction. See McNutt v. Gen. … Individual claimants, therefore, must look beyond the jurisdictional statute for a waiver of sovereign immunity. United States v. Mitchell, 445 U.S. at 538 , 100 S.Ct. 1349 .

Industrial Tectonics Bearings Corp. v. United States

44 Fed. Cl. 115 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Jun 30, 1999

Plaintiff disputes the government’s characterization of Modification P00005 (Pl.’s Issues No. 3), particularly that the Modification “clearly delineated] ITB’s responsibilities for its inventory.” Def.’s Facts No. 3. … The DCAA qualified ITB’s entire report “because all the physical inventory items are missing.” Id.

Waterman v. Secretary of Health and Human Services

United States Court of Federal Claims · Jul 22, 2015

Waterman would later report to the police that, prior to immunization, “he had been very healthy with the exception of some previous slight jaundice.” Pet. Ex. 13 at 2. … To establish entitlement to compensation under the Program, Petitioners are required to establish each of the three prongs of Althen by a preponderance of the evidence. See id.

Plasan North America, Inc. v. United States

109 Fed. Cl. 561 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Mar 11, 2013

On January 13, 2012, the agency held a reverse auction to establish the lowest price. AR 154. … AR 287-88.[* * *] for ES-APIs, BAE experienced consecutive lot failures, requiring it to resubmit and qualify a new first article. AR 287.

Duquette v. Secretary of Health and Human Services

United States Court of Federal Claims · Jun 28, 2016

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 … A history was given noting onset of pain after the Tdap immunization. An EMG was performed on February 13, 2013, which showed mild acute denervation changes in the left C-8 and C-5 innervated muscles. Pet.

Dillon v. Secretary of Health and Human Services

United States Court of Federal Claims · Jan 10, 2014

The chief special master accepted each of these experts as well-qualified. Id. … According to him, a flu vaccine could trigger an immune response targeting the myelin basic protein that provides a protective sheath around the body’s nerve fibers due to the structural similarity between components of

Thermalon Industries, Ltd. v. United States

51 Fed. Cl. 464 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Jan 16, 2002

According to defendant, the promissory notes fail to qualify as allowable deferred compensation. … Miller's time was work expended as a principal investigator, that contention is belied by the audit of the day-timer records which, clearly differentiate between hours Mr.

Ginn v. Secretary of Health and Human Services

United States Court of Federal Claims · Apr 21, 2021

Ex. 13, Tab E at 3.10 The immune system is suggested to play a role in seizure development. Id. C. … Experts Qualifications Both experts are well qualified to opine on the causation issues presented by the facts and circumstances presented in this case. 1. Petitioners – Dr.

Gaynor v. United States

United States Court of Federal Claims · Oct 28, 2020

Cir. 2019) (“Plaintiff bears the burden of establishing jurisdiction by a preponderance of the evidence.”). … Accordingly, this Court quite clearly lacks subject-matter jurisdiction to entertain any of Mr. Gaynor’s claims, pursuant to RCFC 12(b)(1). The Court first addresses why Mr.