Federal Circuit Extends 'Good Faith' Shield of Agencies
Client Alert | less than 1 min read | 08.12.13
In Croman Corp. v. U.S. (July 31, 2013), the Federal Circuit upheld the reasonableness of an agency's corrective action after expanding the protestor's argument into a "bad faith" allegation. When the protestor complained that the cancellation of several CLINs was without a rational basis and put forward evidence that indicated the agency's rationale was pretextual, instead of requiring the agency to put forward proof to support its stated rationale, the court relabeled the challenge as a "bad faith" allegation, which it held the protestor had not shown by clear and convincing evidence.
Contacts
Insights
Client Alert | 2 min read | 04.15.26
Who Invented That? When AI Writes the Code, Patent Validity Issues May Follow
In Fortress Iron, LP v. Digger Specialties, Inc., No. 24-2313 (Fed. Cir. Apr. 2, 2026), the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit reaffirmed what happens when a patent incorrectly lists the true inventors, and that error cannot be corrected under 35 U.S.C. § 256(b), which requires notice and a hearing for all “parties concerned.” In Fortress, the patent owner sought judicial correction to add an inventor under § 256(b), but that inventor could not be located. Because the missing inventor qualified as a “concerned” party under the statute, the lack of notice and a hearing for that inventor made correction under § 256(b) impossible, and the patents could not be saved from invalidity.
Client Alert | 3 min read | 04.14.26
Client Alert | 4 min read | 04.14.26
FedRAMP Solicits Public Comment on Overhaul to Incident Communications Procedures
Client Alert | 5 min read | 04.14.26
