You Makes Your Choice And Takes Your Chances
Client Alert | less than 1 min read | 05.30.06
The Federal Circuit in the Winstar -related case of Old Stone Corp. v. U.S. (May 25, 2006) struck down a $118 million restitutionary damages award to the bank, explaining that, because the bank decided to continue operating after the breach occurred, attempting to make a go of it despite the government's breach, it had waived its right to declare a "total breach" and collect restitutionary damages to put it back in the pre-contracting situation when it went under several years later. On the other hand, foreseeable damages directly related to mitigating the effects of the breach, in this case $74.5 million, were available, and that part of the judgment was affirmed.
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
