GAO Blasts Faulty Past Performance Evaluation
Client Alert | less than 1 min read | 06.24.08
In sustaining the protest in DRS C3 Systems, LLC, (Feb. 26, 2008, http://www.gao.gov/decisions/bidpro/310825.pdf), GAO found that the agency broke nearly every conceivable rule in the past performance evaluation by disregarding the awardee's "extremely adverse" past performance, departing from the stated evaluation criteria, failing to weigh the relevance of available past performance data, and incorporating "various inaccuracies" in the evaluation report. In arriving at its decision, the GAO also highlighted the agency's evolving litigation positions and rejected the agency's "no prejudice" defense when GAO could not "determine that [the awardee's] proposal would remain technically superior overall."
Insights
Client Alert | 2 min read | 11.14.25
Claim construction is a key stage of most patent litigations, where the court must decide the meaning of any disputed terms in the patent claims. Generally, claim terms are given their plain and ordinary meaning except under two circumstances: (1) when the patentee acts as its own lexicographer and sets out a definition for the term; and (2) when the patentee disavows the full scope of the term either in the specification or during prosecution. Thorner v. Sony Comput. Ent. Am. LLC, 669 F.3d 1362, 1365 (Fed. Cir. 2012). The Federal Circuit’s recent decision in Aortic Innovations LLC v. Edwards Lifesciences Corp. highlights that patentees can act as their own lexicographers through consistent, interchangeable usage of terms across the specification, effectively defining terms by implication.
Client Alert | 6 min read | 11.14.25
Microplastics Update: Regulatory and Litigation Developments in 2025
Client Alert | 6 min read | 11.13.25
