1. Home
  2. |Insights
  3. |CFC Has "Pre-Procurement" Protest Jurisdiction

CFC Has "Pre-Procurement" Protest Jurisdiction

Client Alert | 1 min read | 08.29.08

In a case of first impression, the Federal Circuit this week held in Distributed Solutions, Inc. v. U.S. (Aug. 28, 2008) that the Court of Federal Claims' bid protest jurisdiction over an alleged statutory or regulatory violation "in connection with a …proposed procurement" covered a challenge to an agency's decision to acquire software through an existing task order contract rather than by conducting a separate procurement for the software. GAO and the CFC had both dismissed the protest, but the Federal Circuit held that (a) a proposed procurement begins with the agency's process for determining its needs, and (b) that process had occurred here through an agency RFI market research effort, with the consequence that the subsequent agency decision to satisfy its needs through the existing task order contract was subject to the CFC protest jurisdiction over "proposed procurements."

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)....

View All Insights