GAO Finds "Classic Example" Of Impaired Objectivity OCI
Client Alert | less than 1 min read | 09.10.04
In PURVIS Systems, Inc. (Aug. 16, 2004), GAO held that the Navy failed reasonably to consider or evaluate potential organizational conflicts of interest ("OCI") created by the awardee's role in evaluating performance of undersea warfare systems that have been manufactured either by the awardee or its competitors. GAO rejected the awardee's contention that no OCI issues could be created by the awardee's evaluation of the systems because such work was not "part of the procurement process" and explained that the situation presented a "classic example" of an "impaired objectivity" OCI.
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
