Decisions in Patent Infringement Cases Involving Medical Devices

Innovative Therapies, Inc. v. Kinetic Concepts, Inc., No09-1085, involved a district court's dismissal of plaintiff's declaratory judgment action involving patents related to medical devices for treatment of chronic wounds.  In affirming the district court's dismissal on the ground of absence of an actual controversy within the contemplation of the Declaratory Judgment Act, the court agreed that plaintiff's supplemental complaint did not establish an actual controversy at the time of the original pleading and that jurisdiction based on subsequent events did not relate back to the filing date of the initial complaint.  Furthermore, there is no abuse of discretion in the district court's decision to dismiss the action based on facts and circumstances of the case.

Hearing Components, Inc. v. Shure Inc., No. 09-1364, concerned a patent infringement action involving patents related to hearing aid ear piece devices.  The court reversed the district court's conclusion that claims 1 and 2 of plaintiff's '920 patent are indefinite and also reversed the district court's grant of JMOL that defendant's straight-nozzled products do not infringe.  However, the court affirmed the district court's denial of JMOL that defendant's barbed-nozzled products infringe.  Finally, the court held that the district court correctly denied JMOL and upheld the jury's verdict of nonobviousness as legally permissible and supported by substantial evidence and in determining that laches did not apply. 

Related Resources:

• Full text of Innovative Therapies, Inc. v. Kinetic Concepts, Inc
• Full text of Hearing Components, Inc. v. Shure Inc