NIST Now "King of the Hill" on Cyber Standards
Client Alert | 1 min read | 05.14.13
Following its key cyber role in President Obama's Executive Order No. 13636 issued this February, the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) again seized the reins on federal cybersecurity standards on April 30, issuing the 457-page tome, Security and Privacy Controls for Federal information Systems and Organizations, that not only provides the "most comprehensive update" of the core information security controls, but also cuts new ground for cybersecurity standards governing mobile and cloud computing technology, applications security, supply chain protection, advanced persistent threats, and privacy controls for federal agencies and contractors. While some critics have sought to brush back prior NIST standards as too voluminous and technically dense, this latest publication underscores NIST's increasing dominance over cyber standards, as shown by both DoD and the Office of the Director of National Intelligence embracing this NIST update, thus paving the way for federal agencies to flow down new and expanded security standards to government contractors consistent with the executive order's directive to the FAR Council.
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
