This post was originally published on this site
https://i-invdn-com.investing.com/news/LYNXNPEC0D0AP_M.jpg
(Reuters) – Becton Dickinson (NYSE:BDX)’s C.R. Bard Inc on Friday won a ruling from a U.S. appeals court reinstating three patents related to its PowerPort devices for delivering repeated medical injections.
The decision from the Washington, D.C.-based U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit revives a long-running infringement lawsuit Bard brought against Pennsylvania-based Medical Components Inc, which makes competing devices.
The court on Friday also gave Medcomp a new chance to prove that a patent it had accused Bard of infringing was valid.
Medcomp had no comment on the ruling. Representatives for Becton Dickinson did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
Bard sued Medcomp in 2012 over MedComp’s Pro-Fuse CT and Dignity devices in Utah federal court. Bard accused the devices of infringing patents related to its PowerPort, an “access port” for delivering repeated injections of fluids like medicine or blood to patients without using invasive surgeries or new intravenous lines. Medcomp countersued Bard for infringing one of its patents.
Becton Dickinson’s medication delivery devices, including the PowerPort, earned the company more than $2.4 billion in sales last fiscal year, according to a company report with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission.
The case was paused for seven years based on related proceedings at the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office.
The Utah court found both companies’ patents invalid in 2021. It said the patents, which cover markings used to differentiate between types of ports that are visible on X-rays, covered unpatentable abstract ideas.
The Federal Circuit revived the patents on Friday, citing its 2020 decision in a related dispute between Bard and rival AngioDynamics (NASDAQ:ANGO) Inc.
Bard’s patents, like the ones in the AngioDynamics case, covered a novel way to use radiographic markers to convey information, the appeals court said.
The Federal Circuit also ordered the Utah court to reconsider whether Medcomp’s similar patent was valid.
The case is C.R. Bard Inc v. Medical Components Inc, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, No. 22-1136.
For Bard: Kathleen Sullivan of Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan
For Medcomp: Alfred Zaher of Montgomery McCracken Walker & Rhoads
