D.C. Circuit Creates Split over the Reach of the First-to-File Bar
Client Alert | 1 min read | 04.18.14
In U.S. ex rel. Shea v. Verizon Co., the D.C. Circuit held that (1) two complaints may be "related" even if they involve different agencies or contracts, (2) the bar applies even when the same relator filed the earlier action, and (3) it continues to operate even after the earlier-filed action is resolved. The third holding (which drew a dissent) conflicts with dicta from two other circuits and the Fourth Circuit's 2013 opinion in U.S. ex rel. Carter v. Halliburton Co., petition for cert. filed (discussed here), holding that the first-to-file bar only applies while the earlier action is still pending.
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
