Contractor Must Actually Receive Final Decision To Start The Clock
Client Alert | less than 1 min read | 05.20.05
The Federal Circuit in Riley & Ephriam Constr. Co. (May 18, 2005) emphasized that the Contract Disputes Act requires actual delivery of the final decision to the contractor or its designated agent before the time to file an appeal at the board or a case in the Court of Federal Claims starts to run. In this case, the Federal Circuit rejected as "receipt" by the contractor both delivery to a P.O. box and a fax transmission sheet to the contractor's attorney when receipt of the fax was denied and the CO did not follow up to confirm receipt personally.
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
