1. Home
  2. |Insights
  3. |A Bridge Too Far: Court Vacates FHWA's 2012 Expansion of Its Buy America Waiver

A Bridge Too Far: Court Vacates FHWA's 2012 Expansion of Its Buy America Waiver

Client Alert | 1 min read | 01.15.16

On December 22, 2015, the U.S. district court for D.C. vacated the Federal Highway Administration's position, set forth in a December 2012 policy memorandum, that exempted manufactured steel products from the FHWA's Buy America restriction if (a) they had less than 90% steel or iron content or (b) they were "miscellaneous steel or iron products" (i.e., off-the-shelf products necessary to "encase, assemble and construct manufactured products"), causing FHWA on January 6 to rescind the policy memorandum, pending further update. The court held that both of FHWA's "clarifications" related to a 1983 public interest waiver exemption for manufactured products other than steel products; were substantive rules requiring notice and comment; and that, in any event, the 90% content rule was arbitrary and capricious under the current record.

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)....