1. Home
  2. |Insights
  3. |To Recuse or Not to Recuse: OGE Updates Guidance

To Recuse or Not to Recuse: OGE Updates Guidance

Client Alert | 1 min read | 07.26.16

On July 26, 2016, the Office of Government Ethics issued a final rule updating the Standards of Ethical Conduct for Employees of the Executive Branch, subpart F, “Seeking Other Employment” (5 C.F.R. 2635), to clarify recusal requirements. Recusals are required when the scope of the federal employee’s duties has a “direct and predictable” effect on the financial interest of an entity with whom the employee is either negotiating prospective employment or with whom the employee has any agreement concerning prospective employment, and the final rule also adds a new section to implement the statutory notification requirements under section 17 of the STOCK Act, which applies to individuals required to file public financial disclosure reports.

Insights

Client Alert | 2 min read | 11.14.25

Defining Claim Terms by Implication: Lexicography Lessons from Aortic Innovations LLC v. Edwards Lifesciences Corporation

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....