Don Mansfield Posted August 17, 2022 Report Share Posted August 17, 2022 https://ecf.cofc.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/show_public_doc?2022cv0364-41-0 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
here_2_help Posted August 17, 2022 Report Share Posted August 17, 2022 Don, why do you find the decision notable? Is it because the CoFC found it had jurisdiction to hear the protest, or for another reason? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Don Mansfield Posted August 18, 2022 Author Report Share Posted August 18, 2022 16 hours ago, here_2_help said: Is it because the CoFC found it had jurisdiction to hear the protest? Yes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
formerfed Posted August 18, 2022 Report Share Posted August 18, 2022 I wonder now if GAO will use similar logic in considering OTA protests? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
here_2_help Posted August 18, 2022 Report Share Posted August 18, 2022 A law firm's take on the decision Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
formerfed Posted August 19, 2022 Report Share Posted August 19, 2022 23 hours ago, here_2_help said: A law firm's take on the decision The last part is a little too self-serving for the law firm though Quote Although the Court ultimately rejected Hydraulics’ protest on the merits, the Court’s willingness to exercise jurisdiction is a welcome development. OTA protest jurisdiction still remains somewhat unsettled, but Hydraulics provides helpful guidance to protesters on the factors that may militate in favor of a challenge to an OTA award. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts