Unanimous Supreme Court Cabins Wartime Suspension of Limitations Act
Client Alert | 1 min read | 05.27.15
The Supreme Court on Tuesday handed down KBR v. U.S. ex rel. Carter, in which it unanimously reversed the Fourth Circuit's interpretation of the Wartime Suspension of Limitations Act, whose text, structure, and history all show it to be limited to criminal offenses—it does not toll the statute of limitations on civil FCA cases. The Court also unanimously affirmed the Fourth Circuit's interpretation of the FCA's first-to-file bar, and thus resolved a split with the D.C. Circuit, by holding that a qui tam complaint that has been dismissed is no longer "pending" within the meaning of the bar and, therefore, will not preclude future, related actions.
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
