Contractor Claims Forfeited Under Fraud Statutes
Client Alert | 1 min read | 08.06.14
The Federal Circuit in Veridyne Corp. (July 15, 2014) held that a contractor whose claims for payment were forfeited under the Special Plea in Fraud Statute (applicable when the contractor "knew that its submitted claims were false and . . . intended to defraud the government by submitting [its] claims") was not entitled to recovery even in quantum meruit for the value of work completed and accepted by the government. At the same time, the Federal Circuit upheld the imposition of False Claims Act penalties for each invoice submitted under a contract extension because the contractor's misleading proposal caused the extension to be "infected with fraud," and it upheld additional, CDA penalties for invoices found to be "unsupported."
Contacts
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
