Case law

Sacramento Municipal Utility District v. United States

63 Fed. Cl. 495 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Jan 19, 2005

Dallas, 493 U.S. 215, 231 , 110 S.Ct. 596 , 107 L.Ed.2d 603 (1990) (holding that the burden is on the party seeking to exercise jurisdiction by clearly alleging facts sufficient to establish jurisdiction). … Jan. 17, 2003) (entering judgment for plaintiffs on the issue of liability based on Federal Circuit decisions that clearly establish liability against the United States); Florida Power & Light Co. v.

Rice Services, Ltd. v. United States

59 Fed. Cl. 619 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Jan 13, 2004

The Federal Circuit disagreed: “the cited comments are clearly not sufficient to establish a judicial imprimatur and they do not constitute a ‘court-ordered change in the legal relationship’ of the parties as Buckhannon requires … [Wjhere the plaintiff secures a remand requiring further agency proceedings because of alleged error by the agency, the plaintiff qualifies as a prevailing party (1) without regard to the outcome of the agency proceedings

Gay v. United States

116 Fed. Cl. 22 · United States Court of Federal Claims · May 13, 2014

Gay did not have a treatable psychiatric condition, was rational, fully alert, thinking clearly and mentally responsible. … Gay qualified for a VA-disability rating relating to his PTSD did not alter its view of Mr.

Css, LLC v. United States

United States Court of Federal Claims · Jun 8, 2020

That gap is too much in light of the court’s obligation to narrowly construe the Tucker Act’s waiver of sovereign immunity. … Second, plaintiff has not asserted claims that qualify as both direct and derivative based on the dual-nature exception.

International Fidelity Insurance v. United States

42 Cont. Cas. Fed. 77,368 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Aug 31, 1998

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 . … Defendant contends that the complaint fails to establish subject matter jurisdiction.

Ksc Boss Alliance, LLC v. United States

United States Court of Federal Claims · Mar 29, 2019

Under the Performance Work Statement (at PWS 1.2.1-23), the contractor was required to “[m]anage the established counts of SOs and BRRs with the established counts exchange rate (ECER)” and “[e]xchange the established counts … As noted above, to prevail in its challenge to the contracting officer’s competitive range determination, KBA must establish that it was “clearly unreasonable.”

Red River Computer Co., Inc. v. United States

120 Fed. Cl. 227 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Feb 27, 2015

There is nothing in the analysis of the SSEB, however, which clearly establishes that it penalized plaintiff for not reporting the results of the five more recent contracts. … As we stated before, an agency has a broad discretion to choose among qualified offerors in doing a best-value determination.

Milik v. Secretary of Health & Human Services

121 Fed. Cl. 68 · United States Court of Federal Claims · May 14, 2015

Respondent further responds—also correctly—that the Vaccine Act standard of review is clearly limited to the deferential arbitrary and capricious standard. … Pediatric neurologists are the medical specialists most qualified to diagnose developmental delays in a child, more so even than pediatricians. . . . Dr.

Entergy Nuclear Vermont Yankee, LLC v. United States

95 Fed. Cl. 160 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Sep 24, 2010

Second, DOE clearly foresaw that nuclear power plants would be purchased and sold to other entities during the many years that the Standard Contract would be in place. … Contel Advanced Sys., Inc., 384 F.3d 1372, 1379 (Fed.Cir.2004) (“The no-interest rule is an aspect of the basic rule of sovereign immunity.”).

Square One Armoring Services Company v. United States

United States Court of Federal Claims · Sep 22, 2022

Cir. 2016) (“[T]he Government is immune to actions of its agents who merely possess apparent authority.”); Hawkins & Powers Aviation, Inc. v. United States, 46 Fed. … Further, as the spreadsheet was created by an employee of Square One, it clearly falls under the umbrella of “‘self-serving’ documents, [that] are generally insufficient to establish the existence of a genuine issue of

Ammex, Inc. v. United States

56 Fed. Cl. 1 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Mar 26, 2003

Clearly plaintiff failed to go forward with the evidence, i.e., burden, to establish and demonstrate for the court the application of its price computation scheme for its retail gasoline sales. … The foregoing testimony clearly establishes deliberate tracking and reliance on *17 market prices, rather than cost prices, at a level far beyond a mere passing glance or observation.

Flynn v. United States

46 Fed. Cl. 414 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Mar 29, 2000

Flynn would not qualify for benefits under either the 1993 or 1996 version of the SBP, the court should apply the law in effect at the time the court renders its decision. See Bradley v. … Flynn qualifies as a “former spouse” under the SBP statute.

Berg v. United States

49 Fed. Cl. 459 · United States Court of Federal Claims · May 1, 2001

Only an employee who “clearly meets the criteria for exemption,” is ineligible for FLSA overtime pay. 5 C.F.R. § 551.202 (d). … Defendant also argues that “plaintiffs testified to providing technical advice in some form,” in an attempt to identify support services qualifying for the administrative exemption. Mr.

Puckett Sr. v. Secretary of Health and Human Services

United States Court of Federal Claims · Jan 7, 2019

Respondent denies that the aforementioned immunizations caused petitioner’s alleged cardiac arrhythmia, any other injury, or her death. Stipulation at ¶ 6. … No payments pursuant to this Stipulation shall be made until petitioner provides the Secretary with documentation establishing his appointment as legal representative of the Estate of Amanda Nichole Puckett.

System Fuels, Inc. v. United States

78 Fed. Cl. 769 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Oct 11, 2007

Dallas, 493 U.S. 215, 231 , 110 S.Ct. 596 , 107 L.Ed.2d 603 (1990) (holding that the burden is on the party seeking to exercise jurisdiction clearly to allege facts sufficient to establish jurisdiction). … waives that immunity[.]”). 2.

Zoltek Corporation v. United States

United States Court of Federal Claims · Mar 31, 2014

Prior Art References To qualify as prior art for the obviousness analysis, “a reference must qualify as ‘analogous art,’ i.e., it must satisfy one of the following conditions: (1) the reference must be … Sullivan opined that Category 1 was “clearly within the state of the art.” Tr. 166. Because all of the sources relied upon by Dr. Sullivan predate 1983, they qualify as prior art for purposes of obviousness.

Bokmuller v. Secretary of Health and Human Services

United States Court of Federal Claims · Jul 22, 2015

There are two separate means of establishing entitlement to compensation. … If a person qualifies under this presumption, he or she is said to have suffered a “Table Injury.”

American Savings Bank, F.A. v. United States

98 Fed. Cl. 291 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Apr 1, 2011

Reasonable Certainty “[T]he measure of damages must be reasonably certain, although if ‘a reasonable probability of damage can be clearly established, uncertainty as to the amount will not preclude recovery.’ ” Fifth Third … Ramirez is qualified to present Plaintiffs’ lost profits calculations which came from his actual experience with the data.

Buckeye Power, Inc. v. United States

38 Fed. Cl. 154 · United States Court of Federal Claims · May 28, 1997

. § 501(c)(12). 6 First, defendant *159 argues that the income from plaintiffs sale of non-firm power to its members was not cooperative in nature and thus did not qualify as member income. … However, [the TAM taxpayer’s] operations are clearly distinguishable from the situation where sales to some members are reduced below cost to offset the costs of other members.

Blocker Clark v. Secretary of Health and Human Services

United States Court of Federal Claims · Aug 27, 2019

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 … To satisfy this test, it is generally necessary for petitioner to submit a supportive opinion from a qualified medical expert and supporting medical literature.