Government Sees $104 Million Verdict Vanish After Its Theory of Liability Is Rejected Post-Trial
Client Alert | 1 min read | 01.08.15
U.S. ex rel. Bunk v. Birkart Globalistics, an FCA case spanning twelve years and two jury trials, came to an apparent end when the district court set aside the jury's verdict and damages award of $104 million, ruling that the government's theory of liability failed as a matter of law. The government's upset "expectations" of competitive bidding was itself an insufficient ground for a finding of falsity, and the government failed to show that any of the cargo carriers bidding on the contracts "presented a claim for payment based on a prime rate that was, in fact, inflated because of Gosselin's alleged conduct" and failed to present sufficient evidence of damages.
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
