Federal Circuit Drops Bombshells on CDA Statute of Limitations and CAS "Materiality" Test
Client Alert | less than 1 min read | 12.11.14
In Sikorsky Aircraft Corp. v. U.S., the Federal Circuit upended the prevailing case law on the CDA statute of limitations by holding that the six-year SOL for filing CDA claims is "not jurisdictional" and "need not be addressed before deciding the merits." In denying the merits of the government's $80 million CAS 418 claim, the Federal Circuit also held that the cost of Sikorsky's management and supervision was "not a material amount of the total pool costs" because managers/supervisors comprised only 7 to 14 percent of the pertinent workforce, clarifying that materiality requires "a significant amount."
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
