Fourth Circuit Extends Time For Retaliation Claims
Client Alert | 1 min read | 05.10.04
In US ex rel Wilson v. Graham County Soil & Water Conserv. Dist. (4th Cir. April 29, 2004) (a 2-1 decision perhaps inviting en banc review) the 4th Circuit joined the 7th Circuit in holding that the 6-year statute of limitations contained in the False Claims Act also applies to retaliation claims brought under § 3730(h), even though the 6 years commences with the submission of a false claim, which, of course, necessarily precedes any act of retaliation. The majority rejected the 9th Circuit interpretation that limits the FCA limitation period to the substantive causes of action under § 3729 and for retaliation claims looks to the statute of limitations applicable to the most analogous state cause of action which, in this case, would have been North Carolina's 3 year period applicable to wrongful discharge.
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
