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 | 2 min read | 11.14.25
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.
Client Alert | 6 min read | 11.14.25
Microplastics Update: Regulatory and Litigation Developments in 2025
Client Alert | 6 min read | 11.13.25
