Termination Clause Trumps Cost-Sharing
Client Alert | less than 1 min read | 01.30.06
The Federal Circuit in Jacobs Eng'g Group, Inc. v. U.S. (Jan. 19, 2006) had before it the interesting scenario of the government terminating a contract with an 80/20 cost share and the contractor insisting that it should get "all" its costs under the termination for convenience clause, not just 80% per the cost share. The court agreed, because the cost share had not been specifically incorporated in the termination clause and the termination had deprived the contractor of his compensating benefit for taking the cost share in the first place, patent rights in the finished work.
Insights
Client Alert | 4 min read | 04.08.26
Cosmetics Under the Microscope: FDA’s Expanding Regulatory Reach Under MoCRA
The Modernization of Cosmetics Regulation Act of 2022 (MoCRA) marked the most significant expansion of FDA’s authority over cosmetics in 80 years — and the agency is putting that authority to work. From the launch of a new adverse event reporting tool to forthcoming rules on fragrance allergens and good manufacturing practices (GMP), FDA is reshaping the regulatory landscape for manufacturers, packers, and distributors of cosmetic and personal care products.
Client Alert | 11 min read | 04.08.26
Client Alert | 3 min read | 04.07.26
Answering the Top Seven Questions About Pending Section 301 Deadlines
