CFC Rules That GAO Made Faulty OCI Analysis
Client Alert | 1 min read | 07.21.10
In Turner Constr. Co. v. U.S., the Court of Federal Claims effectively reversed a decision by the GAO in which it had found an organizational conflict of interest resulting from intermittent acquisition negotiations between a subcontractor of the awardee and the parent of a company that assisted the Army Corps of Engineers in preparing the solicitation and evaluating proposals, negotiations that resulted in a post-award acquisition. The Army had followed the GAO recommendation and had disqualified the original awardee, Turner, but the Court concluded that the agency had erred by relying upon the GAO decision because that decision was irrational in light of the fact that GAO had applied the wrong standard of review and “[GAO] overturned the CO’s determination without highlighting any hard facts that indicate a sufficient alignment of interests" between the two companies.
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
