Contractor Logs Victory in Termination Case at Federal Circuit
Client Alert | less than 1 min read | 03.02.15
In EM Logging v. Department of Agriculture, 2014-1227 (Feb. 20, 2015), the Federal Circuit reversed the Civilian Board of Contract Appeals, holding that substantial evidence did not support the Board's conclusion that the US Forest Service had properly terminated a timber sale contract for "flagrant disregard" of the terms of the contract. On appeal, the court found that the record supported only four instances of route deviation, load limit violations, or delayed notifications, and held that the contractor's actions did not justify termination because termination for "flagrant disregard" must be "predicated on more than technical breaches of minor contract provisions or isolated breaches of material contract provisions which caused no damage."
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
