Pitiful Price Evaluation Unfairly Caters To Certain Bidders
Client Alert | less than 1 min read | 01.03.06
In R&G Food Service, Inc., d/b/a Port-a-Pit Catering (Sept. 15, 2005 http://www.gao.gov/ decisions/bidpro/2964354.pdf), GAO sustained the protester's challenge to the agency's determination that its prices were not fair and reasonable. The GAO's found that, by improperly limiting its price evaluation to an examination of unit prices without also considering the estimated quantities of each item, the agency therefore failed to consider the likely actual cost to the government from the competing proposals.
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
