1. Home
  2. |Insights
  3. |Contractor Gets "Second Bite" When Final Decision Reconsidered

Contractor Gets "Second Bite" When Final Decision Reconsidered

Client Alert | less than 1 min read | 08.03.15

In LRV Envtl., Inc. (July 14, 2015), the ASBCA found that "reconsideration" of a CO's final decision resets the 90-day clock for a CDA appeal. The CO had issued a final decision, but subsequently reconsidered a portion of it on its own motion, leading the board to conclude that "the decision was not truly final" prior to the reconsideration and so the contractor's 90-day appeal window ran from the latter decision.


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....