One Employee's Fraud Bars Company's Monetary Claim
Client Alert | 1 min read | 07.19.16
In Laguna Constr. Co. v. Carter (July 15), the Federal Circuit denied Laguna’s claim seeking $2.9 million in unpaid invoices because an employee pled guilty to accepting subcontract kickbacks in Iraq – fraudulent conduct that the court imputed to the company and ruled was a breach of the “Allowable Cost and Payment” clause. The court ruled that the ASBCA had jurisdiction to rule on the government’s affirmative defense of “prior material breach” that was based on a fraud conviction, that this affirmative defense does not require a separate CO final decision per Maropakis, and that the contractor’s fraud-based breach excused the government’s subsequent breach (failure to pay for the completed and invoiced work) – a reminder to contractors of the importance of ethics training and monitoring.
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
