view of the “over-the-wire” type guide mechanism at the center of litigation between Getinge and Abiomed. [Image from the court filing]
This lawsuit dates back to 2016, when heart pump maker Abiomed, now a Johnson & Johnson MedTech unit, sued Getinge’s Maquet for a judgment of non-infringement of a trio of patents. Counter-suits later brought the number of disputed patents to six. While that case was proceeding, another Maquet patent issued – U.S. patent No. 9,789,238 (238) covering a “guidable intravascular blood pump and related methods” – was added to the suit.
Maquet appealed a decision from the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts that Abiomed did not infringe on certain claims relating to U.S. patent No. 10,238,783 (783). Maquet did not challenge the judgment of non-infringement on the 238 patent.
(The court document outlining the appeals court’s decision can be found here.)
A look at the decision that revives the suit between Getinge and Abiomed
In a March 21 decision, the court entered final judgment based on the stipulation of non-infringement in light of the district court’s construction of certain claims on patent 783. The appeals court determined that the district court misconstrued the claim terms at issue. Therefore, it rejected the constructions, vacated and remanded as to the 783 patent. Judges Reyna, Taranto, and Cunningham left the judgment on 238 undisturbed.
Patent 738 relates to an intravascular blood pump system for deploying a pump to a desired location in a patient’s circulatory system. It aimed to improve intravascular pump systems by eliminating the need for supplemental guide mechanisms. Its integrated guide mechanisms include “over-the-wire,” “side-rigger” or “rapid exchange” and “guide catheter” mechanisms.
Maquet argued that the district court erred in construing a claim around the guidewire not passing through the rotor hub or catheter within the 783 patent. It said there is no identicality in the claim limitations at issue and that it never made a clear and unmistakable claim disavowal of a guide wire running through the free space of the rotor blades during the prosecution of a separate patent. Effectively, the prosecution history of a patent (728) was not relevant to the 783 patent.
The appeals court held that the district court erred in construing the guide mechanism term around the guidewire in the 783 patent. Judges rejected the district court’s claim constructions and vacated the final judgment, remanding for proceedings consistent with their opinion.
