In the recent case of Acumed, LLC v. Stryker Corp.,et al., (No. 2007-1115) (Fed. Cir., May 13, 2008) (“Acumed II”), the Federal Circuit addressed the meaning and application of language barring re-litigation of claims that “could have been brought” in a prior patent infringement case.
New Judicial Opinions
Plaintiff-appellant Accumed, LLC (“Acumed”) was a holder of a patent relating to nail products used in treating bone fractures (“’444 patent”). It filed this appeal after the U.S. District Court for the District of Oregon dismissed its action for patent infringement against defendant-appellee Stryker Corporation, Stryker Sales Corporation, Stryker Orthopaedics,…
Date of ruling: