Plaintiffs Seek Supreme Court Review in Federal Circuit Tucker Act Case
Client Alert | 1 min read | 02.12.19
On February 4, several health plans (including C&M client Maine Community Health Options) filed petitions for certiorari at the U.S. Supreme Court, seeking review of the Federal Circuit’s opinion in the ACA “risk corridors” cases, which held that while the risk corridors program contained a mandatory payment obligation on the part of the Government, that payment obligation was temporarily suspended by appropriations riders that restricted HHS funds available to satisfy the obligation, even though the riders did not amend or repeal the statutory payment obligation and even though the health plans had already performed their own reciprocal obligations under the statute. The petitioners are seeking review of the Federal Circuit’s opinion on several grounds, including (i) the restriction of funds to an agency via appropriations rider does not extinguish a statutory payment obligation of the United States, (ii) a rider that does not by its terms repeal or amend a money-mandating statute cannot impliedly and retroactively extinguish the Government’s payment obligation. The Maine petition is linked here.
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
