Patent Law Updates | New Judicial Opinions

August 25, 2008

Federal Circuit Finds Cordis' Cardiac Catheters Infringed Dr. Voda's Patents, But Affirms Denial of Injunctive Relief

Jan K. Voda v. Cordis
2007-1297, -1343, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, 8/18/2008

Holding:

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed a jury's finding that Cordis Corp.'s curved catheter infringed Dr. Jan K. Voda's patented catheters that consisted of straight portions. The Federal Circuit explained that Voda introduced substantial evidence establishing that the redesigned curve portion of the XB catheter meets the "straight" and "substantially straight limitations" under the doctrine of equivalents. On the issue of willfulness, the Federal Circuit found that, based on case records, a jury instruction in accord with the In re Seagate objective recklessness standard may have changed the result of the jury verdict on willfulness. Accordingly, it vacated the finding of willfulness and remanded the case for a determination of whether Cordis’ infringement was willful under the objective recklessness standard of Seagate. With regard to the district court's denial of permanent injunction, the Federal Circuit rejected Voda's argument based on the irreparable harm to its exclusive licensee. The Federal Circuit reasoned that irreparable harm must fall on the party seeking injunction. Here, Voda failed to show that Cordis’s infringement caused him irreparable injury and that monetary damages were inadequate to compensate him. Accordingly, the Federal Circuit affirmed the district court’s denial of Voda’s request for a permanent injunction.

Detailed Summary:

This is a patent infringement case involving catheters used in interventional cardiology. The issues on appeal and cross-appeal include claim construction, patent validity, infringement, willfulness, and the district court’s denial of a permanent injunction. Opinion, p. 1.

Dr. Jan K. Voda, M.D., (“Voda”) sued Cordis Corporation (“Cordis”) for infringement of his ’625 patent, ’213 patent, and ’195 patent in the United States District Court for the Western District of Oklahoma. The parties tried the case to a jury, and it returned a verdict finding that Cordis willfully infringed all asserted claims of the patents-in-suit and that claims 1 through 3 of…

E-mail Email this Article
Print Printable Version (in new window)
View a PDF of the judicial opinion

Companies Mentioned

Cordis Corp.

More Updates

Patent Law Updates

Companies Mentioned

Patent Law

The following companies are mentioned in Patent Law Updates:

Boston Scientific Corp.

Microsoft Corp.

U.S. Patent and Trademark Office

Stryker Corp.

Samsung Electronics America, Inc.

Cordis Corp.

Boston Scientific Scimed, Inc.

Kohl’s Department Stores, Inc.

K-Mart Corp.

J.C. Penney Company, Inc.

Audiovox Communications Corp.

Glamourmom LLC

McKesson Information Solutions, Inc.

Federated Department Stores

Bridge Medical, Inc.

Elizabeth Lange LLC d.b.a. Liz Lange Maternity

United States Patent and Trademark Office

Smithkline Beecham Corp. (d.b.a. GlaxoSmithKline, plc.)

SmithKline Beecham PLC

SmithKline Beecham Corp. d.b.a GlaxoSmithKline

Scimed Life Systems Inc.

HT Window Fashion Corp.

Glaxo Group Limited d.b.a. GlaxoSmithKline

Ortho-McNeil Pharmaceutical, Inc.

Ranbaxy, Inc.

Mylan Pharmaceutical, Inc.

Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc.

Mylan Laboratories, Inc.

Nokia, Inc.

Stryker Sales Corp.

Stryker Orthopaedics

Howmedica Osteonics Corp.

Acumed, LLC

Quanta Computer, Inc.

Sanyo North America Corp.

LG Electronics, Inc.

Smith & Nephew, Inc.

Cohesive Technologies, Inc.

Waters Corp.

Swisa, Inc.

Egyptian Goddess, Inc.

Motorola, Inc.

Dror Swisa

Johnson & Johnson, Inc.

Target Corp.

Sears Holding Corp.

Mayo Collaborative Services d.b.a. Mayo Medical Laboratories

Lien Chang Electronic Enterprise Co., Ltd.

Chi Mei Communication Systems, Inc.

Citibank

Additional Resources

Patent Law