Court Applies Totten Reasoning To Subcontractor Liability Under FCA
Client Alert | 1 min read | 03.23.05
Applying the reasoning of the D.C. Circuit in U.S. ex rel. Totten v. Bombardier Corp., 380 F.3d 488 (D.C. Cir. 2004), regarding lack of False Claims Act (FCA) liability for claims made by contractors of federal grantees when those claims are not presented to the Government for payment [see Crowell & Moring Bullet Points 9/16/2004 and 12/16/04), the Southern District of Ohio in U.S. ex rel. Sanders v. Allison Engine Co. (Mar. 11, 2005) dismissed a qui tam case for failure to present evidence that the defendant subcontractor's claims had been presented to the government for payment. In so doing, the court distinguished longstanding Supreme Court precedent imposing subcontractor liability when the prime passes the sub's false claim up to the government.
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
