1. Home
  2. |Insights
  3. |No PRB Cost Adjustment For Segment Closings

No PRB Cost Adjustment For Segment Closings

Client Alert | 1 min read | 06.02.10

In related decisions filed on April 29, the Court of Federal Claims effectively precluded contractors from recovering any costs for unfunded post-retirement benefits (primarily retiree medical and life insurance) in connection with business segment closings, absent a specific contract provision promising to indemnify the contractor for the unfunded liability. In Raytheon v. U.S., the court held that benefits covered by so-called 401(h) subaccounts in the contractor's pension plan (a relatively uncommon situation) are not "pension benefits" and, therefore, are not subject to the segment-closing provisions of CAS 413; in Gen. Elec. Co. v. U.S., the court held that pay-as-you-go benefit plans covering retired employees and dependents (by far the more common situation) are not subject to the provisions of CAS 413 requiring "segment closing" adjustments for pension costs.

Insights

Client Alert | 2 min read | 11.14.25

Defining Claim Terms by Implication: Lexicography Lessons from Aortic Innovations LLC v. Edwards Lifesciences Corporation

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....