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 | 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
