Check For Weed
Client Alert | less than 1 min read | 02.19.10
In Agredano v. U.S. (Feb. 17, 2010), the Federal Circuit reversed the Court of Federal Claims decision that Customs and Border Protection breached an implied-in-fact warranty when it sold a car at auction containing concealed marijuana, drugs that ultimately resulted in the purchaser spending a year in a Mexican prison. The Federal Circuit held there was no implied-in-fact warranty that the car did not contain contraband, finding there was no meeting of the minds required to form such a warranty because Customs' regulatory duty to remove contraband from the forfeited vehicle did not create a contractual obligation and the agency had expressly disclaimed any and all warranties at the auction.
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
