1. Home
  2. |Insights
  3. |Absent Formal Elimination, Offerors Have Standing to Pursue Size Protests

Absent Formal Elimination, Offerors Have Standing to Pursue Size Protests

Client Alert | 1 min read | 12.14.16

In granting an appeal filed by Crowell & Moring, the SBA’s Office of Hearings and Appeals overturned an underlying area office decision dismissing a company’s challenge to the eligibility of an awardee in a DoE set-aside procurement. Rejecting the area office’s grounds that the company “would not have a reasonable chance” to be selected for award even if it prevailed in its size protest, OHA held that the company had standing to protest because its low technical ratings did not render its proposal unacceptable and the agency had made no finding that it was otherwise ineligible for award.

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....