1. Home
  2. |Insights
  3. |DOL Again Applies Expansive Interpretation of "Subcontractor"

DOL Again Applies Expansive Interpretation of "Subcontractor"

Client Alert | less than 1 min read | 10.29.10

In Office of Fed. Contract Compliance Programs v. Fla. Hosp. of Orlando (Oct. 28, 2010), a DOL Administrative Law Judge determined that a hospital providing medical services pursuant to an agreement with a TRICARE-managed care support contractor was a government subcontractor for purposes of a DOL audit of the hospital's compliance with its affirmative action and non-discrimination obligations. As discussed further in our blog, the ALJ analogized the hospital's status in this case to the hospital that provided medical services pursuant to an agreement with an FEHBP contractor in the UPMC Braddock case last year, which is currently under appeal.

Contacts

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....