Clear as Day: ASBCA Finds No Ambiguity in Contract
Client Alert | 1 min read | 11.15.17
In Appeal of Family Entertainment Services, the Board denied a contractor’s claim that the government improperly reduced the amount that it paid under a military base maintenance contract. The contractor claimed, in part, that the parties’ contract was ambiguous as to the definition of the word “days” during the period of performance (PoP), and argued that the Board should read the term “days” to mean “work days” rather than “calendar days.” The Board rejected the contractor’s argument, noting that the contract incorporated FAR 52.212-4, which incorporates the FAR 2.101 definition defining “day” as “unless otherwise specified, a calendar day.” The Board cited long-standing Federal Circuit precedent that a differing opinion of contract terms alone does not give rise to an ambiguity, a reminder to contractors to carefully scrutinize the performance requirements in their contracts, including the PoP and any terms defined by the FAR.
Contacts
Insights
Client Alert | 3 min read | 11.20.25
Design patents offer protection for the ornamental appearance of a product, focusing on aspects like its shape and surface decoration, as opposed to the functional aspects protected by utility patents. The scope of a design patent is defined by the drawings and any descriptive language within the patent itself. Recent decisions by the Federal Circuit emphasize the need for clarity in the prosecution history of a design patent in order to preserve desired scope to preserve intentional narrowing (and to avoid unintentional sacrifice of desired claim scope).
Client Alert | 3 min read | 11.20.25
Client Alert | 6 min read | 11.19.25
Client Alert | 4 min read | 11.18.25
DOJ Announces Major Enforcement Actions Targeting North Korean Remote IT Worker Schemes
