CO Must Identify Extension for Final Decision with Precision
Client Alert | less than 1 min read | 05.27.14
In Suh'dutsing Techs., LLC, the ASBCA held that the contractor could appeal a "deemed denial" of its certified claim 60 days after submission of the claim, notwithstanding the contracting officer's statement that it would be "at least another sixty days . . . before I am able to issue a decision." The Board held the CO's statement was "insufficiently definite" under the Contract Disputes Act, which requires a CO to, within 60 days of receiving a certified claim over $100,000, either issue a decision or "notify the contractor of the time within which a decision will be issued."
Contacts
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).
Client Alert | 5 min read | 11.26.25
Client Alert | 6 min read | 11.25.25
Brussels Court Clarifies the EU’s SPC Manufacturing Waiver Regulation Rules
Client Alert | 3 min read | 11.24.25
