Inadequate Documentation Dooms Cost Realism Evaluation
Client Alert | less than 1 min read | 02.14.12
In TriCenturion, Inc.; SafeGuard Services, LLC (Jan. 25, 2012), a case in which C&M represented one of the protesters, GAO sustained challenges to the agency’s determination that the awardee’s proposed labor costs were realistic in light of its technical approach, finding that the “inadequate” and “apparently incomplete” evaluation record, which the agency was unable to bolster through hearing testimony, failed to support the agency’s conclusions. GAO also sustained challenges to the agency’s technical and past performance evaluations.
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
