Unfair Disqualification Results In Reinstatement
Client Alert | less than 1 min read | 12.19.05
The Court of Federal Claims in OTI America, Inc. v. U.S. (Dec. 7, 2005) reinforced that offerors must be treated evenhandedly, setting aside a disqualification of OTI for high-tech passports when other offerors had been kept in the competition for lesser failures. Joining a recent spate of cases analyzing what relief can be given in light of government assertions of national defense, the court reinstated OTI in the competition, but allowed a pilot project with another offeror to continue, as multiple awards were contemplated.
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
