Cancellation Of RFP Upended
Client Alert | less than 1 min read | 08.18.05
In Rand & Jones Enters. Comp., Inc. (Aug. 4, 2005 http://www.gao.gov/decisions/bidpro/296483.htm), GAO held that Veterans Affairs lacked a reasonable basis for canceling an RFP when the cancellation was based on no technical evaluation factors in the RFP and the agency intended to issue an IFB for the same requirement. Both the RFP and IFB would be based on the same evaluation factor (price), no evidence suggested that the government or the integrity of the procurement system would be prejudiced if the RFP were not cancelled, and the low offeror would be prejudiced by recompetition since its low price had previously been disclosed publicly.
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
