J&J wins latest stent patent battle with Boston Scientific
The Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit has found that Boston Scientific stent patent is invalid, which in part is directed to drug-eluting stents and coating systems.
In the decision, the court found that the patent was invalid as obvious over the prior art. The case was an appeal by Johnson & Johnson (J&J) of a 2005 jury verdict in the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware that found the patent was valid and infringed by J&J subsidiary Cordis’ Cypher sirolimus-eluting stent system. The verdict was appealed before it reached the stage to determine damages.
The District Court judge in that case decided to take the jury verdict as an “advisory decision,” which New Brunswick, N.J.-based J&J appealed. However, the appeals court decided not to reinstate the damage verdict awarded to Boston Scientific in the earlier case, instead remanding it back to the district court judge to decide.
The Natick, Mass.-based Boston Scientific said it “is considering its options for challenging the decision.”
In related news, the U.S. Supreme Court rejected a bid by Boston Scientific to overturn a jury finding in a separate stent patent case in October 2008, between the two companies that led to a $703 million award in J&J’s favor. That appeal centered on liability. The Federal Circuit is still considering issues related to the amount of the damage award.
In the decision, the court found that the patent was invalid as obvious over the prior art. The case was an appeal by Johnson & Johnson (J&J) of a 2005 jury verdict in the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware that found the patent was valid and infringed by J&J subsidiary Cordis’ Cypher sirolimus-eluting stent system. The verdict was appealed before it reached the stage to determine damages.
The District Court judge in that case decided to take the jury verdict as an “advisory decision,” which New Brunswick, N.J.-based J&J appealed. However, the appeals court decided not to reinstate the damage verdict awarded to Boston Scientific in the earlier case, instead remanding it back to the district court judge to decide.
The Natick, Mass.-based Boston Scientific said it “is considering its options for challenging the decision.”
In related news, the U.S. Supreme Court rejected a bid by Boston Scientific to overturn a jury finding in a separate stent patent case in October 2008, between the two companies that led to a $703 million award in J&J’s favor. That appeal centered on liability. The Federal Circuit is still considering issues related to the amount of the damage award.