Watch for Conversion of Best-Value Evaluation to Lowest-Cost, Technically Acceptable
Client Alert | less than 1 min read | 12.04.13
With budgetary pressures increasing, agencies are more prone to make cost the determinative factor in their evaluations – regardless of the actual evaluation scheme – improperly converting a procurement into a lowest-cost, technically acceptable one. As demonstrated in GAO's recent decision in Logistics 2020, Inc. (Nov. 6, 2013), this may occur when a solicitation calls for a best-value award, but the agency uses evaluation criteria that merely measure whether proposals are technically acceptable, not whether any qualitative differences exist between proposals.
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
