Intellectual Property Law

Judge Robinson: Plaintiffs? motion for summary judgment of invalidity of all patents at issue GRANTED.

By Karen E. Keller, Andrew A. Lundgren et al.

Plaintiffs Boston Scientific Corporation and Boston Scientific Scimed Inc. (?BSC?) brought four patent infringement actions against Johnson & Johnson Inc. and Cordis Corporation (?J&J?) seeking a judgment of invalidity for four coronary stent patents. Boston Scientific Corporation, et al. v. Johnson & Johnson Inc., et al., C.A. No. 07-333-SLR (D. Del. Jan. 20, 2010) (consolidated). BSC moved for summary judgment of invalidity. Judge Robinson granted BSC?s motion on the basis that J&J?s patent specifications contain insufficient written descriptions. For example, three of the patents contained ?no definitions, examples, or experimental models provided for determining whether a compound is a structurally similar analog as contemplated by the patentees.? Id. at 24. Because, based on the disclosure, a person skilled in the art would not recognize a description of the claimed analogs, ?no reasonable jury could find that the written description requirement has been met with respect to the claimed analogs.? Id. at 26. In addition, Judge Robinson found non-enablement because a person with ordinary skill in the art could not make the claimed invention without undue experimentation. Id. at 27.

Judge Robinson also determined that the fourth patent was invalid due to failures in the written description. Id. at 30. Specifically, the relevant analogs were not ?named, structurally depicted, exemplified, or otherwise described in the ?662 patent specification.? Id. Moreover, ?although limited by function, the claims of the ?662 patent are drawn to a genus of [certain] analogs without any description of any species within the genus. The Federal Circuit has required the identification of ?sufficient species? to show that the totality of the genus was invented and disclosed.? Id. at 31 (citing Carnegie Mellon Univ. v. Hoffman-LaROche Inc., 541 F.3d 1115, 11261 (Fed. Cir 2008)).

Boston Scientific Corporation, et al. v. Johnson & Johnson Inc., et al., C.A. No. 07-333-SLR (D. Del. Jan. 20, 2010)

Full post as published by Delaware IP Law Blog on January 25, 2010 (boomark / email).