Federal Circuit Upholds Corrective Action After Outcome Prediction
Client Alert | less than 1 min read | 10.27.15
In Raytheon Co. v. U.S. (Oct. 23, 2015), the Federal Circuit upheld the CFC's denial of Raytheon's protest challenging corrective action taken in response to the GAO's outcome prediction statement that the unequal treatment challenge of a competitor would likely be sustained. The Federal Circuit agreed with the CFC that the Air Force's challenged pre-award communication with Raytheon amounted to unequal and misleading discussions and, therefore, the Air Force had a rational basis for reopening the bidding process.
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
