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 | 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
