Skip to main content
Skip to floating mini video
Reuters home

Abbott unit must face heart catheter patent lawsuit, appeals court says

By
2 minute read

The ticker and trading information for St. Jude Medical is displayed where the stock is traded on the floor of the New York Stock Exchange (NYSE) in New York City, U.S., April 28, 2016. REUTERS/Brendan McDermid

Register now for FREE unlimited access to Reuters.com
  • Ruling against St. Jude Medical finds district court wrongly invalidated parts of licensing company's patent
  • Broad patent terms not necessarily indefinite, Fed Circ says
The company and law firm names shown above are generated automatically based on the text of the article. We are improving this feature as we continue to test and develop in beta. We welcome feedback, which you can provide using the feedback tab on the right of the page.

(Reuters) - Abbott Laboratories subsidiary St. Jude Medical must again face claims that its catheters for treating heart failure violate a patent licensing company's rights, a U.S. appeals court ruled Monday.

A Minnesota federal court incorrectly decided that parts of a Niazi Licensing Corp patent were too vague to be patented, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit said.

River Hills, Wisconsin-based Niazi sued St. Jude in 2017, alleging St. Jude's CPS Aim SL catheters infringed its patent covering a heart catheter.

Register now for FREE unlimited access to Reuters.com

District Judge Wilhelmina Wright ruled in 2019 that most of the relevant parts of the patent were invalid, finding its terms "resilient" and "pliable" did not describe the technology at issue clearly enough. Wright also found last year that St. Jude did not induce others to infringe the remaining part of the patent.

The Federal Circuit reinstated most of the patent parts and Niazi's infringement claim on Monday. Circuit Judge Kara Stoll wrote for a three-judge panel that "resilient" and "pliable," though broad, were definite enough to properly describe aspects of the invention.

Other parts of the patent clarified what the terms meant in context, as did outside evidence provided by Niazi, Stoll said. The appeals court sent the case back to the Minnesota court to determine whether St. Jude violated Niazi's revived patent rights and give St. Jude a chance to prove the patent parts are invalid for other reasons.

The Federal Circuit also affirmed the court's decision that St. Jude did not induce infringement, and it approved nearly $36,000 in sanctions against Niazi for violating a district court order by introducing testimony that should have been excluded.

The companies and their attorneys did not immediately respond to requests for comment.

The case is Niazi Licensing Corp v. St. Jude Medical S.C. Inc, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, No. 21-1864.

For Niazi: Michael Griggs of Boyle Fredrickson

For St. Jude: Kalpesh Shah of Benesch Friedlander Coplan & Aronoff

Register now for FREE unlimited access to Reuters.com

Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles.

Washington-based correspondent covering court cases, trends, and other developments in intellectual property law, including patents, trademarks, copyrights, and trade secrets. Previous experience at Bloomberg Law, Thomson Reuters Practical Law and work as an attorney.

Industry Insight