Past Performance CDA Appeal Revisited
Client Alert | less than 1 min read | 08.04.09
In Todd Constr. L.P. v. U.S. (July 22, 2009), Judge G. Miller, following up on his prior decision that a contractor may file a CDA appeal of an adverse past performance determination, provided guidance on the scope of relief available to the plaintiff, namely, a remand to the agency with "just and proper" directions from the court to assist the agency in addressing identified concerns. The court cites to and adopts a number of the recommendations made in a recent article by C&M's John McCarthy and Addie Cliffe.
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
