Finally Heard – Cyber Help for Small Businesses is on Its Way
Client Alert | 1 min read | 08.22.18
New cybersecurity legislation was recently passed that aims to help smaller government contractors in their efforts to safeguard sensitive customer data. The NIST Small Business Cybersecurity Act requires the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) to issue guidance and resources, within the next year, to help small- and medium-sized businesses identify, assess, and reduce cybersecurity risks. Partly in response to the rising number of cyberattacks targeting small businesses, the legislation is the latest in a series of efforts more broadly focused on supply chain security throughout the procurement process. Under the Act, NIST must also:
- Ensure future resources can vary with the nature and size of the small business, as well as the nature and sensitivity of the data handled.
- Encourage the use of technology neutral, commercial off-the-shelf (COTS) solutions.
- Promote awareness of basic controls, a workplace cybersecurity culture, and third-party stakeholder relationships.
Contacts
Partner, Crowell Global Advisors Senior Director
- Washington, D.C.
- D | +1.202.624.2698
- Washington, D.C. (CGA)
- D | +1 202.624.2500
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
