Following GAO Recommendation Doesn't Insulate Agency's Action After Protest
Client Alert | less than 1 min read | 08.18.11
The Federal Circuit in Turner Constr. Co. v. U.S. held that the Army should not have followed the recommendation of a GAO bid protest decision to disqualify an awardee based upon alleged organizational conflicts of interest ("OCIs") because the GAO decision failed to identify "hard facts" supporting the existence of an OCI and, therefore, "lacked a rational basis." Upholding the CFC decision and citing that court's authority to "award any relief that [it] considers proper," the Federal Circuit also let stand an order enjoining reprocurement and reinstating the awardee's contract, which the Army had terminated in response to the GAO decision.
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
