1. Home
  2. |Insights
  3. |Cert Denied in Closely Watched FCA Penalties Case

Cert Denied in Closely Watched FCA Penalties Case

Client Alert | less than 1 min read | 10.15.14

On Monday, the Supreme Court denied certiorari in Gosselin World Wide Moving v. U.S. ex rel. Bunk, in which the petitioners questioned to what extent the Eighth Amendment's Excessive Fines Clause serves as a check on per-invoice penalties under the False Claims Act. That denial will preserve the Fourth Circuit's holding that a $24 million fine was sufficiently proportional to the gravity of the offense, despite the relator's failure at trial to seek—let alone prove—any economic harm to the government.


Insights

Client Alert | 2 min read | 11.14.25

Defining Claim Terms by Implication: Lexicography Lessons from Aortic Innovations LLC v. Edwards Lifesciences Corporation

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....