1. “Whether, after Loper Bright and related decisions, courts must independently interpret solicitation requirements as questions of law rather than defer to an agency’s interpretation when evaluating bid protests under the APA. The petition argues that the appellate court deferred to the United States Army Corp of Engineers’ (‘USACE’) interpretation of solicitation requirements instead of independently deciding what the Solicitation required, in tension with the APA’s command that courts ‘shall decide all relevant questions of law.’”
2. “Whether an agency may reject a proposal based on unstated evaluation criteria or post hoc demands that do not appear in the solicitation. This petition contends that the USACE faulted Anders Construction, Inc. (‘Anders’ or ‘Petitioner’) for not expressly labeling a ‘Lost Diver Plan’ and for not providing a ‘more comprehensive’ outline of administrative and record-keeping procedures—standards the Solicitation did not specify or require.”
