Fraudulent Claim Gets The Triple Whammy
Client Alert | less than 1 min read | 03.03.09
In Daewoo Eng'g and Constr. Co. v. U.S. (Fed. Cir. Feb. 20, 2009), the Federal Circuit affirmed the CFC's findings that the contractor had submitted a $64 million claim involving approximately $50 million based on material misrepresentations that amounted to a fraud. From this, the contractor received the triple whammy of forfeiting its entire claim under the CDA, being penalized $50 million under the CDA, and being fined $10,000 under the FCA.
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
