Nyet: Board Finds Insufficient Evidence to Grant Summary Judgment on SOL Grounds
Client Alert | less than 1 min read | 07.06.16
In Kellogg Brown & Root Servs., Inc. (June 16, 2016), the ASBCA denied KBR’s motion for summary judgment regarding two government demands for repayment of alleged overcharges that KBR argued were barred by the CDA’s six-year statute of limitations. Citing Sikorsky, the board held that, even though KBR had presented numerous documents to show that the government was made aware of its challenged practices more than six years before the final decisions, the documents themselves (without more) failed to establish undisputed material facts sufficient to meet the post-Sikorsky burden of proof in light of the government’s opposing evidence.
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
