1. Home
  2. |Insights
  3. |False Estimates: A Misguided Notion Under The FCA

False Estimates: A Misguided Notion Under The FCA

Client Alert | 1 min read | 07.22.05

Just as Russian officials have sought to hold weather forecasters liable for bad predictions, some qui tam relators and federal agencies have sought to stretch the False Claims Act (FCA) to impose liability for false estimates. In his article "The Strange Notion of Estimates as Fraud: Will Weather Predictions Be Next Under the False Claims Act?" published in The Procurement Lawyer (Summer 2005 http://www.crowell.com/pdf/BodenheimerSUM05.pdf), David Z. Bodenheimer explains that these "false estimate" allegations cannot be squared with common law rules that generally exclude opinions and predictions as a basis for fraud, FCA requirements that demand objective (not subjective) proof of falsity, and basic federal procurement standards that recognize the subjectivity inherent in estimating future costs.

Insights

Client Alert | 2 min read | 11.14.25

Defining Claim Terms by Implication: Lexicography Lessons from Aortic Innovations LLC v. Edwards Lifesciences Corporation

Claim construction is a key stage of most patent litigations, where the court must decide the meaning of any disputed terms in the patent claims.  Generally, claim terms are given their plain and ordinary meaning except under two circumstances: (1) when the patentee acts as its own lexicographer and sets out a definition for the term; and (2) when the patentee disavows the full scope of the term either in the specification or during prosecution.  Thorner v. Sony Comput. Ent. Am. LLC, 669 F.3d 1362, 1365 (Fed. Cir. 2012).  The Federal Circuit’s recent decision in Aortic Innovations LLC v. Edwards Lifesciences Corp. highlights that patentees can act as their own lexicographers through consistent, interchangeable usage of terms across the specification, effectively defining terms by implication....