Beware The Cooperative Agreement
Client Alert | less than 1 min read | 04.21.08
In Rick's Mushroom Service, Inc. (Apr. 2, 2008), the Federal Circuit held that a contractor who had a cooperative cost sharing agreement for mushroom waste remediation was out of luck when it followed defective government specifications and had to pay third parties close to $1 million for environmental violations. The Federal Circuit denied Rick's claims for indemnification, holding there was no Contract Disputes Act jurisdiction and that the Spearin doctrine, which provides that the government breaches an implied warranty when it supplies a contractor with defective specifications, was inapplicable because there was no procurement contract and because the doctrine does not extend to third-party claims.
Insights
Client Alert | 2 min read | 11.14.25
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.
Client Alert | 6 min read | 11.14.25
Microplastics Update: Regulatory and Litigation Developments in 2025
Client Alert | 6 min read | 11.13.25
