Christian Doctrine Applied to Subcontract
Client Alert | 1 min read | 04.05.13
As discussed in more detail in a Crowell Alert issued today, the U.S. District Court for D.C. in UPMC Braddock v. Harris (Mar. 30, 2013) relied on the Christrian doctrine, a rule derived from case law that allows for the inclusion in a contract by operation of law of omitted government contract clauses expressing a significant public procurement policy, to incorporate affirmative action clauses into a subcontract between certain hospitals and a managed care organization with a Federal Employees Health Benefits Program prime contract. This is the first instance of which we are aware that a court has used the Christian doctrine to incorporate federal procurement obligations into a subcontract.
Contacts
Insights
Client Alert | 6 min read | 11.26.25
From ‘Second’ to ‘First:’ Federal Circuit Tackles Obvious Claim Errors
Patent claims must be clear and definite, as they set the boundaries of the patentee’s rights. Occasionally, however, claim language contains errors, such as typographical mistakes or incorrect numbering. Courts possess very limited authority to correct such errors. The United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit has emphasized that judicial correction is appropriate only in rare circumstances, where (1) the error is evident from the face of the patent, and (2) the proposed correction is the sole reasonable interpretation in view of the claim language, specification, and prosecution history. See Group One, Ltd. v. Hallmark Cards, Inc., 407 F.3d 1297, 1303 (Fed. Cir. 2005) and Novo Indus., L.P. v. Micro Molds Corp., 350 F.3d 1348, 1357 (Fed. Cir. 2003).
Client Alert | 5 min read | 11.26.25
Client Alert | 6 min read | 11.25.25
Brussels Court Clarifies the EU’s SPC Manufacturing Waiver Regulation Rules
Client Alert | 3 min read | 11.24.25
