A federal judge handed a win to Medtronic Inc. (NYSE:MDT) in its patent spat over implantable cardiac defibrillators with Boston Scientific (NYSE:BSX), ruling that Medtronic didn’t violate a pair of valid BSX patents.
Judge Susan Robinson of the U.S. District Court for Delaware decided that the Medtronic devices (the InSync, Concerto, Maximo II and Consulta ICDs) did not infringe two patents licensed to Boston Scientific, even though she decided that the intellectual property is valid.
That’s not the only ICD case Medtronic is embroiled in, nor the only one to log a recent victory for the Fridley, Minn.-based medical device giant. A federal judge on its home turf in the Land of 10,000 Lakes dismissed most of the claims in a class action lawsuit over allegedly faulty ICDs.
Judge Patrick Schiltz of the U.S. District Court for Minnesota dismissed state law consumer protection, express warranty, unfair and deceptive trade practices and unjust enrichment claims on preemption grounds, ruling that the state claims can’t be brought because they’re superseded by federal medical device rules. The case was brought by insurance companies seeking reimbursement for the cost of replacing the devices.
Lawsuit: ReGen still using Menaflex IP after rights transfer
A public relations firm is suing bankrupt ReGen Biologics Inc. (PINK:RGBO), accusing the orthopedic products maker of violating a slew of patents and trademarks covering its Menaflex knee device after transferring the rights.
ReGen filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection last month after the FDA rescinded a 510(k) clearance for the Menaflex implant, designed to repair torn knee cartilage.
The complaint, filed in the U.S. District Court for Arizona by Off Madison Ave. Inc., alleges that ReGen violated eight patents and five trademarks after assigning them to the Tempe, Ariz.-based public relations firm.
Alere spat with Chinese distributor grinds on
A legal dispute between Alere Inc. (NYSE:ALR) subsidiary Inverness Medical Beijing and a Chinese distributor is winding its way through the court system in the People’s Republic, where Chinmax Medical Systems Inc. said the Beijing Chaoyang District Court sent investigation letters to China Customs, State Taxation Office, and the State Food & Drug Administration "seeking the relevant documentation," according to a press release.
"The court is currently in the process of collecting this evidence from the China authorities. Chinmax believes the evidence will support both the China litigation against IMB and the U.S. arbitration Chinmax has filed against Alere San Diego for fraud, breach of contract and unfair competition due to unfair and illegal conduct," according to the release.
Shanghai-based Chinmax claims to hold the exclusive right to distribute the Biosite Triage line of diagnostic products in China and filed suit in March 2010 against IMB and another distributor, Shanghai Tongwei Medical Device Co. Ltd., accusing them of infringing that right.
Palomar/Candela lawsuit to go to trial
Palomar Medical Technologies Inc.’s (NSDQ:PMTI) wedding present for Candela Corp. and Syneron Inc. (NSDQ:ELOS), a patent infringement lawsuit, is slated to go to trial after a Massachusetts judge tossed a Candela motion that he declare the patent invalid.
Palomar re-filed the suit over a "Hair Removal Using Optical Pulses" patent after Syneron and Candela announced their merger. The courts decision follows a pair of decisions in the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office and the European Patent Office. Both entities upheld the bulk of device maker’s patents as "novel and inventive" over its competitors’. Palomar filed the original lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for Massachusetts. Candela then sought summary judgment that its device does not infringe the patent, but Judge Rya Zobel of the U.S. District court for Massachusetts denied the motion. But Zobel also ruled that Palomar couldn’t prove three of its infringement claims, leaving just one to be decided during the as-yet-unscheduled trial.