No Separate Takings Remedy Against The Government
Client Alert | 1 min read | 09.27.06
The Federal Circuit, in Zoltek Corp. v. United States , (No. 04-5100, September 21, 2006), denies Zoltek's petition for rehearing en banc . In a clarifying comment to the dissent, the Federal Circuit explains that private parties do in fact have a right of action against the government for unauthorized use of a patent pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1498. However, any such rights are no greater than the rights against private parties, and as the Supreme Court held in Schillinger v. United States , 155 U.S. 163 (1894), Congress has not created a separate parallel takings remedy in the Court of Federal Claims. Thus, since there would be no claim for infringement against a private party under Section 1498 in this case, there is no claim for infringement against the government.
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
