1. Home
  2. |Insights
  3. |Set-Aside Decision Doesn't Require Responsibility Determination

Set-Aside Decision Doesn't Require Responsibility Determination

Client Alert | less than 1 min read | 01.30.14

In Adams & Assocs., Inc. v. U.S. (Jan. 27, 2014), the Federal Circuit affirmed that, when applying the "Rule of Two" in a small business set-aside determination, the contracting officer needs only a "reasonable expectation" that at least two responsible small businesses would submit offers and is not required to undertake a responsibility determination pursuant to FAR 9.104-1. This establishes a relatively low threshold of market research under the "Rule of Two" and confirms that a contracting officer need not collect information on factors such as capability, capacity, and past performance on small businesses at the acquisition planning phase of a procurement.

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....