The Federal Circuit ruled that cancellation of patent claims impacts the doctrine of equivalents, akin to amending claims. Colibri Heart Valve sued Medtronic for alleged patent infringement regarding heart valves. Colibri's theory was based on perceived equivalency between their patent's claim and Medtronic's valve deployment mechanism. However, Medtronic contended Colibri's theory should be barred under prosecution history estoppel due to cancelled claims during the patent application process. The court agreed, ruling that Colibri was estopped from proving infringement under that doctrine.
Cancellation bears on what can be covered under the doctrine of equivalents... because a relevant artisan would understand the close basic-physics relationship of the cancelled and retained claims.
Colibri was estopped from proving infringement under the doctrine of equivalents due to the cancellation of claims during prosecution, which has a narrowing effect similar to amending claims.
Colibri alleged that Medtronic's Evolut line of heart valves infringed upon the claims of U.S. Patent No. 8900294, based on the method of controlled release.
Medtronic's argument for summary judgment rested on the premise that Colibri's equivalency theory should be barred due to the cancellation during prosecution of certain claims.
#patent-law #doctrine-of-equivalents #prosecution-history-estoppel #patent-infringement #federal-circuit
Collection
[
|
...
]