GSA Seeks Comments on Proposed Class Deviation to Address Open "Recurrent Points of Inconsistency" in Commercial Supplier Agreements
Client Alert | 1 min read | 03.20.15
On March 20, 2015, the General Services Administration published a notice seeking comments on a proposed class deviation to the Federal Acquisition Regulation and General Services Acquisition Regulation intended to address "recurrent points of inconsistency" between Federal law and commercial supplier agreements, to establish that the FAR's commercial item terms take precedence over commercial supplier agreements, and to implement standard terms and conditions in order to minimize the need to individually negotiate agreements. GSA has provided a roadmap to all the terms and conditions customarily used by contractors in commercial supplier agreements (15 in total) that it believes conflict with Federal law; contractors have an opportunity to submit comments on this proposed class deviation on or before April 20, 2015.
Contacts
Insights
Client Alert | 2 min read | 11.14.25
Claim construction is a key stage of most patent litigations, where the court must decide the meaning of any disputed terms in the patent claims. Generally, claim terms are given their plain and ordinary meaning except under two circumstances: (1) when the patentee acts as its own lexicographer and sets out a definition for the term; and (2) when the patentee disavows the full scope of the term either in the specification or during prosecution. Thorner v. Sony Comput. Ent. Am. LLC, 669 F.3d 1362, 1365 (Fed. Cir. 2012). The Federal Circuit’s recent decision in Aortic Innovations LLC v. Edwards Lifesciences Corp. highlights that patentees can act as their own lexicographers through consistent, interchangeable usage of terms across the specification, effectively defining terms by implication.
Client Alert | 6 min read | 11.14.25
Microplastics Update: Regulatory and Litigation Developments in 2025
Client Alert | 6 min read | 11.13.25
