Fed Circuit cancels Bard patent loss
The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit has cancelled a lower court ruling holding that a Bard patent for a vascular access device was both not infringed and patent-ineligible.
In a decision issued Tuesday, November 10, the Federal Circuit said the US District Court for the District of Delaware had misinterpreted its case law on mistakes in an expert witness’ testimony.
The Federal Circuit decision comes as a reprieve for Bard, which is accusing AngioDynamics of infringing patents covering a device that allows for high-pressure vascular injections.
Bard’s patents cover a vascular access port, which allows medical professionals to regularly administer fluids into a patient’s veins without needing to start an intravenous line each time.
The patents cover a type of vascular access port which enables a high-pressure injection known as a “power injection”, for which ordinary vascular access ports are not suitable. Bard’s devices bear the letters “CT”, visible on an x-ray, to indicate to medical professionals that they are suitable for the procedure.
The Delaware court granted AngioDynamics summary judgment, holding that Bard’s expert witness had mistakenly interpreted the claims of the patents to require that the device be intended for use with power injection, contrary to the court’s claim construction.
AngioDynamics convinced the Delaware court that this mistake meant the witness could not present “triable issues of fact” as to whether the patents were infringed.
The district court also held that the patents were invalid because they were directed to “printed matter”, referring to the markings on the device to signal their suitability for power injection.
But the Federal Circuit overturned the Delaware court’s findings, ruling that the expert witness’ conclusion of infringement did not necessarily rely on his error.
The appeals court also held that, while the “printed matter” was not entitled to “patentable weight”, the patents are not solely directed to this aspect of the device. The Federal Circuit remanded the case for further proceedings at the Delaware court.
Did you enjoy reading this story? Sign up to our free daily newsletters and get stories sent like this straight to your inbox.
