Federal Circuit Compounds Contractors' Interest Problems
Client Alert | 1 min read | 03.04.11
Over the vigorous dissent by several judges, the Federal Circuit on March 1, 2011, denied a petition for en banc review of its decision in Gates v. Raytheon, 584 F.3d 1062 (Fed. Cir. 2009), which held that, because the Cost Accounting Standards (CAS) statute requires interest on cost impacts for CAS violations to be calculated at the rate established under 26 U.S.C. § 6621, the interest must be compounded in accordance with 26 U.S.C. § 6622, even though the CAS statute does not refer to or incorporate § 6622 by reference. As we reported on September 24, 2010, the same interest rate is referenced in the Truth in Negotiations Act (TINA), and a proposal is pending to amend the FAR to require compound, rather than simple, interest to be used in calculating damages for TINA violations.
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
