context: In order to qualify as third-party beneficiaries to a government contract, the parties must show that the United States waived its defense of sovereign immunity. The court's Tucker Act jurisdiction extends only to plaintiffs in privity of contract with the Government.
citation_a.signal: no signal
citation_a.identifier: 331 F.3d 899, 899
citation_a.parenthetical: holding that "for the government to be sued on a contract pursuant to the Tucker Act, there must be privity of contract between the plaintiff and the United States"
citation_a.sentence: Chancellor Manor, 331 F.3d at 899 (holding that “for the government to be sued on a contract pursuant to the Tucker Act, there must be privity of contract between the plaintiff and the United States”); see Katz v. Cisneros, 16 F.3d 1204, 1210 (Fed.Cir.1994) (holding that “[a]bsent privity between [plaintiffs] and the government, there is no ease”).
citation_b.signal: see
citation_b.identifier: 16 F.3d 1204, 1210
citation_b.parenthetical: holding that "[a]bsent privity between [plaintiffs] and the government, there is no ease"
citation_b.sentence: Chancellor Manor, 331 F.3d at 899 (holding that “for the government to be sued on a contract pursuant to the Tucker Act, there must be privity of contract between the plaintiff and the United States”); see Katz v. Cisneros, 16 F.3d 1204, 1210 (Fed.Cir.1994) (holding that “[a]bsent privity between [plaintiffs] and the government, there is no ease”).