News & Analysis as of

Patents Medical Devices Claim Construction

A&O Shearman

Federal Circuit Invalidates Patent For Angioplasty Catheter Based On Applicant Admitted Prior Art

A&O Shearman on

The Federal Circuit recently issued a precedential decision in Shockwave Med., Inc. v. Cardiovascular Sys., Inc. (CSI), affirming-in-part and reversing-in-part the Patent Trial and Appeal Board’s (PTAB) decision, and...more

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP

Shockwave Medical, Inc. v. Cardiovascular Systems, Inc. (Fed. Cir. 2025)

Received wisdom is that inter partes review proceedings are limited to prior art as defined by patents and printed publications.  But in recently decided Shockwave Medical, Inc. v. Cardiovascular Systems, Inc., another prior...more

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP

Recor Medical, Inc. v. Medtronic Ireland Mfg. (Fed. Cir. 2025)

The inter partes review provisions of the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act have been criticized for the propensity of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) to find invalid all or at least some of the challenged claims,...more

Vorys, Sater, Seymour and Pease LLP

The Precedent: The Federal Circuit Remands and Reassigns District Court Patent Infringement Case to a New Judge

In this edition of The Precedent, we outline the decision in Trudell Medical International Inc. v. D R Burton Healthcare LLC. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit recently affirmed in part, reversed in part and...more

Knobbe Martens

Niazi’s Patent Survives on Appeal: Federal Circuit Reverses In Part Lower Court’s Decision

Knobbe Martens on

On April 11, 2022, Niazi Licensing Corporation (“Niazi”) succeeded in part in its appeal at the Federal Circuit in Niazi Licensing Corporation v. St. Jude Medical S.C. Inc. Niazi’s lawsuit alleged that St. Jude Medical S.C....more

Knobbe Martens

“Pliable” Language Results in “Resilient” Patent Claims

Knobbe Martens on

NIAZI LICENSING CORPORATION v. ST. JUDE MEDICAL S.C., INC. Before Taranto, Bryson, and Stoll. Appeal from the U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota. Summary: Providing examples in the claim language and...more

Fox Rothschild LLP

Judge Andrews Issues Markman Opinion Construing Remaining Terms In Dispute In Four Patents-In-Suit In Infringement Action...

Fox Rothschild LLP on

By Memorandum Opinion entered in Conformis, Inc. v. Medacta USA, Inc., Civil Action No. 19-1528-RGA (D.Del. March 4, 2021), The Honorable Richard G. Andrews construed the remaining terms in dispute in the four (4)...more

McDermott Will & Emery

Size Matters in Obviousness Analysis

McDermott Will & Emery on

The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed in part and reversed in part two Patent Trial and Appeal Board (Board) decisions, finding that the Board erred in its construction of certain claim terms relating to an...more

Schwabe, Williamson & Wyatt PC

Latest Federal Court Cases - October 2020 #3

Immunex Corp. v. Sanofi-Aventis U.S. LLC, Appeal Nos. 2019-1749, -1777 (Fed. Cir. Oct. 13, 2020) - In our Case of the Week, the Federal Circuit addressed the construction of the term “human antibodies.” In doing so, the...more

Morrison & Foerster LLP

What Are the Top Hatch-Waxman and BPCIA Developments for November 2018?

Morrison & Foerster LLP on

This month we highlight two reversals by the Federal Circuit and a summary judgment of indefiniteness from New Jersey. CASES - Federal Circuit - Grant of Preliminary Injunction Reversed - Indivior Inc. v. Dr....more

Robins Kaplan LLP

Lessons for Life Science and Medical Device Companies Post-Nautilus

Robins Kaplan LLP on

Under the U.S. Patent laws, claims must particularly point out and distinctly claim what the inventor understands her invention to be. Up until three years ago, the inquiry for determining indefiniteness was to ask whether...more

Morris James LLP

Claim Terms Are Construed In Medical Devices Case

Morris James LLP on

Andrews, J. Claim construction opinion issues regarding two terms from one patent. A Markman hearing took place on November 17, 2016. The disputed technology relates to biometric belt connectors....more

McDermott Will & Emery

Look to Specification to Interpret Facially Unclear Claims

McDermott Will & Emery on

Addressing claim construction issues, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit reiterated the necessity of reading claims in the context of the written description when they are not clear on their face. Howmedica...more

Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox P.L.L.C.

Design Patent Case Digest: Ethicon Endo-Surgery, Inc. v. Covidien, Inc.

Decision Date: August 7, 2015 - Court: U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit - Patent: D661,801; D661,802; D661,803; D661,804 - Holding: Summary judgment of invalidity REVERSED; claim construction...more

Morris James LLP

Claims Are Construed Relating To Bone Screw Technology

Morris James LLP on

Globus Medical, Inc. v. Depuy Synthes Products, LLC., et al., C.A. No. 13-854-LPS, August 14, 2015 - Stark, C.J. Claim construction opinion regarding 10 terms from 2 patents-in-suit...more

Morris James LLP

Claims Are Construed Relating To Spine Stabilizer

Morris James LLP on

Andrews, J. The court construes terms relating to a patent for a device used to stabilize a human spine. The case was filed in January 2014. Oral argument was held on May 14, 2015 regarding 8 terms of one patent-in-suit....more

Snell & Wilmer

Federal Circuit Holds Biosig’s Patent Definite Under New Standard

Snell & Wilmer on

Applying the Supreme Court’s new “reasonable certainty” standard for patent definiteness in Biosig Instruments, Inc. v. Nautilus, Inc. (2015) (Nautilus III), the Federal Circuit again held that Biosig’s patent for a heart...more

Foley & Lardner LLP

Federal Circuit Holds That Patent Indefiniteness Requires Insoluble Ambiguousness

Foley & Lardner LLP on

In Biosig Instruments, Inc. v. Nautilus Inc., the Federal Circuit reversed the district court’s finding that the claims at issue were invalid as indefinite, because the claims were not “insolubly ambiguous.” This case...more

BakerHostetler

Patent Watch: Biosig Instruments, Inc. v. Nautilus, Inc.

BakerHostetler on

On April 26, 2013, in Biosig Instruments, Inc. v. Nautilus, Inc., the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (Newman, Schall, Wallach*) reversed and remanded the district court's summary judgment that U.S. Patent No....more

19 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 1

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
- hide
- hide