Case law

Monbo v. United States

United States Court of Federal Claims · Jun 16, 2025

As the Government correctly points out, “the proposal clearly shows that the offer was submitted by Monbo Group rather than [Ms. Monbo] herself as an individual.” … The agreement therefore fails to establish that a proposal submitted in the name of MGI should be considered a joint proposal submitted by MGI and Ms.

Torres Advanced Enterprise Solutions, LLC v. United States

United States Court of Federal Claims · Oct 2, 2017

Guillory wrote: The FAR clauses which are incorporated by reference into the contract clearly put the burden of implementing quality control onto the contractor. … Torres has used more than 20 qualified guards, including several Senior Guards, as Mobile Patrol drivers in a constant search to improve the work of the [local guard force], specifically the Mobile Patrols.

Caquelin v. United States

United States Court of Federal Claims · Nov 6, 2018

Caquelin’s hands, the property thus qualifies as a “Century Farm” in Iowa parlance. The house in which Mrs. Caquelin was born and raised abuts her farmland and was viewed during the site visit. … To establish a viable takings claim, Mrs. Caquelin must prove two things. First, she must establish that she had “a property interest for purposes of the Fifth Amendment.” Members of the Peanut Quota Holders Ass’n v.

Young v. Secretary of Health and Human Services

United States Court of Federal Claims · Apr 27, 2018

On February 25, 2016, petitioner filed exhibit 12, an immunization record which showed that he actually received the influenza vaccination on October 24, 2013. (ECF No. 15). … If the petitioner establishes that he suffered such a “Table Injury,” causation is presumed. Grant v.

OTI America, Inc. v. United States

73 Fed. Cl. 758 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Oct 31, 2006

Given these facts, OTI has not established that NIST acted “unfairly or irrationally in evaluating [OTI’s] offer[ ].” Banknote, 56 Fed.Cl. at 383 . … Isratex simply requires that any "mandatory minimum requirement ... be clearly identified as such.” Banknote, 56 Fed.Cl. at 382 (explaining Isratex, 25 Cl.Ct. 223 ). .

One Largo Metro, Llc v. United States

109 Fed. Cl. 39 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Feb 21, 2013

A Source Selection Evaluation Board was established to evaluate offers. … Clearly, there’s a distinction. There was no significant weakness in One Largo, so that’s -- absolutely.

Allner v. Secretary of Health and Human Services

United States Court of Federal Claims · Oct 12, 2022

and its territories or in another geographical area but qualifying for a limited exception; suffered the residual effects of his injury for more than six months, died from his injury, or underwent a surgical intervention … As I have previously observed, “the Vaccine Act clearly does not require that symptoms be recorded within a specific timeframe to be preponderantly established.

Carrasquillo v. Secretary of Health and Human Services

United States Court of Federal Claims · May 1, 2024

It was unknown at that time whether she would be able to timely follow-up with her doctors such that she would have her medical diagnosis clearly listed in her records. Id. … Cir. 2011) (affirming a special master’s decision to dismiss a petition when petitioner could not establish that she had any of the three diagnoses alleged).

Bussa v. Secretary of Health and Human Services

United States Court of Federal Claims · Jun 27, 2019

However, reasonable basis is clearly a separate standard for petitions not resulting in compensation. … Ex. 35]. 7 Citing Sejvar J.J. et al., Guillain-Barré syndrome and Fisher syndrome: Case Definitions and Guidelines for Collection, Analysis, and Presentation of Immunization Safety Data, 29 Vaccine 599 (2001) [Resp.

Northrop Grumman Corp. v. United States

47 Fed. Cl. 20 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Jun 16, 2000

The contract, the specification, and the SOW establish the performance baseline. … Trial did not establish the exact number of AIs and to which party they were assigned.

Resource Investments, Inc. v. United States

97 Fed. Cl. 545 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Mar 17, 2011

This authorization is not otherwise qualified or made subject to court approval. … Nevertheless, Barrows’s decision clearly signals his fear of the prospect of criminal prosecution, although this prospect is at best hypothetical. 10 Thus, court-ordered compensation from plaintiffs might spare Barrows the

Travelers Casualty & Surety of America v. United States

74 Fed. Cl. 75 · United States Court of Federal Claims · Nov 22, 2006

Hence, “detailed measurements, tolerances, materials, i.e., elaborate instructions on how to perform the contract” qualify as design specifications. Id. (quoting Stuyvesant Dredging Co. v. … George, establishes that this detail is a matter for engineers, not paving contractors. See, e.g., Tr. at 446—47, 550, 556-57.

Spectre Corporation v. United States

United States Court of Federal Claims · Aug 18, 2025

while representing it was designed and fabricated specifically for Spectre, refusing to allow Spectre personnel to witness and videotape fabrication steps, refusing to provide CAD files for mask preparation when the SAA clearly … “Spectre did not argue that NASA had to prove it had performed work before it could be paid for that work[;] it argued [instead] that NASA had to prove it had performed the work for which Spectre had already paid before qualifying

Goldings v. United States

98 Fed. Cl. 470 · United States Court of Federal Claims · May 6, 2011

Evidence developed from that investigation established that Dr. Ivins, alone, mailed the anthrax letters. … However, as clearly noted in the Poster 296, rewards are offered for information and services leading to “the arrest and conviction” of any person for the specified offense.

Simmons v. Secretary of Health and Human Services

United States Court of Federal Claims · Jan 7, 2019

. § 300aa-10-34 (2012), alleging that the tetanus toxoid-diphtheria-acellular pertussis (“Tdap”) vaccine he received on April 11, 2008 caused him anaphylaxis, immune dysregulation, and autoimmune disease leading to Addison … Pain and Suffering In his motion, petitioner argues that his past pain and suffering has clearly exceeded the statutory cap in the decade since his Tdap vaccination and he continues to experience daily pain and emotional

Berrett v. Secretary of Health and Human Services

United States Court of Federal Claims · Mar 29, 2019

That rate is in turn determined by the “forum rule,” which bases the award rate on rates paid to similarly qualified attorneys in the forum where the relevant court sits (Washington, D.C., for Vaccine Program cases). … The receipts filed in Tab C reveal costs associated with additional medical records requests, airfare for two flights to Washington, DC,8 and costs associated with establishing Petitioner’s representative capacity following

Dasilva v. Secretary of Health and Human Services

United States Court of Federal Claims · Nov 16, 2020

In another case, the special master found that there was no reasonable basis for filing a petition out of time because the law “clearly established” that the statute of limitations ran from the first symptom or manifestation … That is unsurprising because this area of the law is not well-established.

Lucier v. United States

United States Court of Federal Claims · Jun 1, 2018

The four right of way deeds specifically and clearly expressed an intention to limit the easement being conveyed to an easement for the construction, operation, and maintenance of a railroad line. … Cl. 797, 805 (stating, under Kansas law, “‘[r]ailroad operations’ and ‘railroad purposes’ seem clearly to be different from recreational trail usage.”), recons. denied, 100 Fed. Cl. 579 (2011).

Pinnacle Solutions, Inc. v. United States

United States Court of Federal Claims · Apr 13, 2018

And so, NASA established a competitive range for the ALICE Contract comprised of only Yulista’s proposal.2 Id. … Pinnacle’s claim that NASA improperly abandoned a weakness regarding the total compensation plan proposed by Yulista’s subcontractor, Qualified Technical Services (“QTS”), is also unsubstantiated. Pl. Mot. at 34-35.

Clear Creek Community Services District v. United States

132 Fed. Cl. 223 · United States Court of Federal Claims · May 17, 2017

In addition, the 2005 long-term contract establishes plaintiff’s entitlement to water beginning in 2005. Id. at A328-31. … Cir. 2006), aff’d, 552 U.S. 130 (2008), and serves “as a condition of the government’s waiver of sovereign immunity[,] . . . [it] must be strictly construed,” Hopland Band of Pomo Indians v.