Christian Doctrine Applied to Subcontract
Client Alert | 1 min read | 04.05.13
As discussed in more detail in a Crowell Alert issued today, the U.S. District Court for D.C. in UPMC Braddock v. Harris (Mar. 30, 2013) relied on the Christrian doctrine, a rule derived from case law that allows for the inclusion in a contract by operation of law of omitted government contract clauses expressing a significant public procurement policy, to incorporate affirmative action clauses into a subcontract between certain hospitals and a managed care organization with a Federal Employees Health Benefits Program prime contract. This is the first instance of which we are aware that a court has used the Christian doctrine to incorporate federal procurement obligations into a subcontract.
Contacts
Insights
Client Alert | 2 min read | 04.15.26
Who Invented That? When AI Writes the Code, Patent Validity Issues May Follow
In Fortress Iron, LP v. Digger Specialties, Inc., No. 24-2313 (Fed. Cir. Apr. 2, 2026), the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit reaffirmed what happens when a patent incorrectly lists the true inventors, and that error cannot be corrected under 35 U.S.C. § 256(b), which requires notice and a hearing for all “parties concerned.” In Fortress, the patent owner sought judicial correction to add an inventor under § 256(b), but that inventor could not be located. Because the missing inventor qualified as a “concerned” party under the statute, the lack of notice and a hearing for that inventor made correction under § 256(b) impossible, and the patents could not be saved from invalidity.
Client Alert | 3 min read | 04.14.26
Client Alert | 4 min read | 04.14.26
FedRAMP Solicits Public Comment on Overhaul to Incident Communications Procedures
Client Alert | 5 min read | 04.14.26
