CFC Awards Full Fees for AF Breach
Client Alert | less than 1 min read | 10.24.13
In SUFI Network Servs., Inc. v. U.S. (Oct. 16, 2013), the CFC awarded SUFI, represented by Crowell & Moring, as breach damages its attorneys' fees and expenses for preparing claim packages that were later successfully litigated. Brushing aside the government's multiple challenges, the court found Crowell & Moring's fees and expenses to be reasonable and awarded them in full, plus interest as provided by agreement, but denied SUFI's request for an overhead and profit burden, finding that the client did not add "any material value" to the claim preparation efforts.
Contacts
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
