1. Home
  2. |Insights
  3. |OFCCP Moves To Eliminate Burdensome EO Survey And Offers "Grace Period" For Compliance With Internet Applicant Rule

OFCCP Moves To Eliminate Burdensome EO Survey And Offers "Grace Period" For Compliance With Internet Applicant Rule

Client Alert | 1 min read | 01.27.06

On January 20, 2005, the Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs issued a notice of proposed rulemaking, finally moving to eliminate the burdensome EO Survey -- as the government contracting community has been urging for years. OFCCP is in the process of developing a new system for selecting audit targets.

The OFCCP has also announced that it will not delay implementation of the "Internet Applicant" rule, but will observe a 90-day "grace period." For 90 days following February 6, 2006, OFCCP will not cite a contractor for a purely technical recordkeeping violation for failure to comply with the Internet Applicant final rule, provided that the contractor (1) demonstrates that it is taking reasonable steps to update its systems to comply with the rule, including a projected date of compliance, and (2) collects and maintains records according to the established procedures consistent with OFCCP's recordkeeping requirements that preexisted the Internet Applicant final rule, i.e., 41 CFR 60-1.12.

Contacts

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....

View All Insights