1. Home
  2. |Insights
  3. |TSA Snared in GAO Protest Jurisdiction

TSA Snared in GAO Protest Jurisdiction

Client Alert | less than 1 min read | 03.19.10

In General Dynamics One Source, LLC, GAO rejected TSA's jurisdictional challenge, holding that Congress revoked TSA's exemption from GAO protests effective June 22, 2008, and that TSA's Phase II solicitation issued in December 2008 could not relate back to the exemption that previously existed for the Phase I competition. On the merits, GAO sustained the protests due to TSA's failure to evaluate price realism when (1) the awardee proposed mismatched staffing approaches in the technical and cost proposals, and (2) the awardee's proposed staffing depended upon hiring incumbent staff at rates well below current incumbent salaries.

Contacts

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....