"The patents at issue cover surgical techniques for treating spinal deformities using linked "derotation tools" that allow surgeons to manipulate multiple misaligned vertebrae simultaneously. Dr. Mark Barry sued DePuy for induced infringement, relying on two experts: Dr. Walid Yassir, an orthopedic surgery professor who opined that DePuy's tools infringed the asserted claims when assembled in certain configurations, and Dr. David Neal, a survey expert who assessed how often surgeons actually used the accused tools in allegedly infringing ways."
"Writing for the majority, Judge Stark concluded that this testimony was (1) permissible applications of the court's claim construction and (2) that methodological criticisms went to evidentiary weight rather than admissibility. Judge Prost dissented, warning that the majority's approach "contravenes the principles embraced in EcoFactor and the 2023 amendments" to Federal Rule of Evidence 702 and "will undermine district courts' abilities to exercise their important gatekeeping function.""
The Federal Circuit reversed the exclusion of two experts and ruled for the patentee. The experts provided testimony that deviated from the court's claim construction and included survey results with questionable methodology. Judge Stark held the testimony applied the court's construction permissibly and that methodological criticisms affect evidentiary weight rather than admissibility. Judge Prost dissented, stating the approach contravenes EcoFactor and the 2023 Rule 702 amendments and will weaken district courts' gatekeeping. The patents cover surgical techniques using linked derotation tools to manipulate multiple misaligned vertebrae simultaneously.
Read at Patently-O
Unable to calculate read time
Collection
[
|
...
]