NAFI Contractor Goes Straight to Court When CO Fails to Issue Final Decision
Client Alert | 1 min read | 01.24.12
In SUFI Network Servs., Inc, v. U.S. (Jan.17, 2012), the Court of Federal Claims denied the government’s motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction, relying on the Federal Circuit’s decision in Slattery v. U.S., 635 F.2d 1298, 1321 (Fed. Cir. 2011) (en banc), that the court has Tucker Act jurisdiction over all NAFI disputes. The court also found, in this non-CDA matter, that the CO had materially breached the contract’s Disputes clause by failing to provide a final decision on SUFI’s claim within a reasonable time, excusing SUFI from going to the board first, as the clause specified.
Contacts
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
