On October 5, 2021, the U.S. Federal Circuit reversed a finding of invalidity by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) for patent claims related to an “artificial valve for repairing a damaged heart valve.” St. Jude Medical LLC (“St. Jude”) filed for an inter partes review (IPR) at the PTAB for U.S. Patent No. 6,821,297, entitled “Artificial Heart Valve, Implantation Instrument and Method Therefor,” owned by Snyders Heart Valve LLC (“Snyders”).
Bioventus recently announced that its shareholders approved its agreement to acquire Misonix. Bioventus agrees to pay Misonix shareholders either 1.6839 shares of Bioventus class A common stock or $28.00 for each share of Misonix common stock held. The amount paid to Misonix shareholders results in an approximate valuation of $518 million for Misonix, based on share prices from around the time the acquisition agreement was reached. With the completion of this acquisition, Misonix will become a wholly-owned subsidiary of Bioventus.
BROOKLYN BREWERY CORPORATION V. BROOKLYN BREW SHOP, LLC Before Judges Dyk, O’Malley, and Hughes. Appeal from the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board. Summary: A challenger must demonstrate an injury in…
ENERGY HEATING, LLC v. HEAT ON-THE-FLY, LLC Before Moore, Prost, and Stoll. Appeal from the U.S. District Court for the District of North Dakota. Summary: Enforcing a patent with knowledge…
TRAXCELL TECHNOLOGIES, LLC V. NOKIA SOLUTIONS AND NETWORKS
Before Prost, O’Malley, and Stoll. Appeal from the Eastern District of Texas.
Summary: An applicant’s arguments distinguishing prior art during patent prosecution constituted a disclaimer of claim scope and estopped the patentee from relying on the doctrine of equivalents to show infringement.
Traxcell Techs., LLC v. Sprint Commn’s Co. et al
Before Prost, O’Malley, and Stoll. Appeal from the Eastern District of Texas.
Summary: A patentee’s extensive citations to evidence failed to avoid summary judgment of noninfringement because the patentee never explained the relevance of this evidence.
MOBILITY WORKX, LLC v. UNIFIED PATENTS, LLC
Before Newman, Schall, and Dyk. Appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board.
Summary: Fee-funded structure of AIA review proceedings does not violate due process.
After inter partes review (“IPR”), the Board found Mobility’s patent claims invalid. Mobility appealed the decision to the Federal Circuit, arguing that the structure and funding of AIA review proceedings violates due process. Particularly, Mobility argued that the Board and the individual administrative patent judges (“APJs”) have impermissible financial incentives to institute IPRs.
NeoChord, Inc. (“NeoChord”) announced on October 4, 2021 that it successfully completed a first-in-human procedure with the NeXuS Transcatheter Mitral Chordal Repair (TMVr) device NeoChord is developing. NeoChord also reported that the patient has been discharged from the hospital and is back to a normal lifestyle.
KANNUU PTY LTD. v. SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO., LTD.
Before Newman, Prost, and Chen. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York.
Summary: The forum selection clause in the parties’ non-disclosure agreement only encompassed proceedings relating to or arising out of the agreement which, in this case, did not extend to inter partes review proceedings.
COSMOKEY SOLUTIONS GMBH & CO. KG V. DUO SECURITY LLC
Before O’Malley, Reyna, and Stoll. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Delaware.
Summary: Patent claims directed to computer-implemented authentication and verification techniques may survive § 101 challenges if they recite specific improvements that provide particular benefits.
