(Attorney tampa florida) Cordis Corp. v. Boston Scientific Corp.
More info…
(U.S. Fed. Cir., Intellectual Property, Patent) In a patent infringement action involving intravascular stents, plaintiff’s appeals are denied where: 1) plaintiff’s stent infringed on defendant’s patent as the court properly constructed the language of the claim and properly concluded that plaintiff’s stent met the “corners” limitation of the patent under the doctrine of equivalents; and 2) there was substantial evidence to support the conclusion that defendant’s patent was not obvious. Defendant’s appeals are denied in all respects save one where: 1) the two monographs prepared by the inventor of plaintiff’s ’762 patent were not prior art printed publications; 2) plaintiff’s ’762 stent patent does not anticipate its ’406 stent patent and is thus valid; 3) different stents created by defendant infringe on both of plaintiff’s stent patents under various limitations of the claims in the patents; and 4) court erred in dismissing plaintiff’s infringement claims against one of defendant’s stents without prejudice instead of with prejudice.
Tags: aviation lawyer
External articles | SEO-FSER | 
April 17, 2009 2:35 pm
No Comments
No comments yet.
RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI
Leave a comment
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Subscribe