CHICAGO, IL – LawFuel – Brinks Hofer Gilson & Lione, one of the largest intellectual property law firms in the U.S., announced a major victory in an important case brought against its long-time client Cook Incorporated by Edwards Lifesciences LLC and EndoGAD Research Pty Limited. On March 18, 2008, the United States District Court for the Northern District of California granted Cook’s motion for summary judgment of non-infringement and rejected all of the patent infringement allegations made by Edwards and EndoGAD. Cook’s defense team was led by Brinks attorneys, Richard A. Kaplan, Bradley G. Lane and Jeffry M. Nichols, and also included Jerold A. Jacover, Thomas J. Filarski, Julie L. Leichtman and Jason W. Schigelone.
Cynthia Kretz, general counsel for Cook, said of the decision: “This is a significant victory for Cook and a vindication of the validity of our extensive patent portfolio in the expanding field of endovascular treatment of aneurysms.”
The case involved four patents listing Dr. Geoffrey White and Dr. Weiyun Yu as inventors and relating to endovascular stent grafts used to repair abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAA) without the need for traumatic open-repair surgery. Edwards and EndoGAD asserted infringement by Cook’s Zenith® AAA Endovascular Graft, Zenith Flex® AAA Endovascular Graft, Zenith® Fenestrated AAA Endovascular Graft and Zenith® TX2 TAA Endovascular Graft.
”We are very pleased that our client Cook’s technology has been vindicated in this important case and that the Court has determined that Cook did nothing wrong. Cook is a global industry leader in this field and its endografts and related devices are based on its own innovative technology and development efforts that had nothing to do with the patents asserted by Edwards and EndoGAD,” said Brinks attorney Richard A. Kaplan.
The Court previously construed the claims after a Markman hearing in 2007. Based on the 2007 claim construction, Cook moved for summary judgment. The Court agreed with Cook’s motion and concluded that none of Cook’s accused products infringed.
According to the Court, in view of the prior claim construction ruling, “no reasonable jury
could conclude that Cook’s accused devices” literally infringed any of the asserted patent claims and that Cook is “entitled to judgment in its favor on this basis.” In addition, the Court concluded “that Edwards cannot, as a matter of law, show that Cook’s accused devices infringe the patents-in-suit under the doctrine of equivalents,” and, therefore, Cook “is entitled to judgment in its favor on this basis as well.”
The patents in the California case are U.S. Patent Numbers 6,582,458; 6,613,073; 6,685,736; and 6,689,158. The case is Edwards Lifesciences LLC et al. v. Cook Incorporated et al., Civil Action No. C 03-3817 JSW, in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California.
Founded in 1917, Brinks Hofer Gilson & Lione is based in Chicago with four additional offices across the country serving the intellectual property needs of clients from around the world. The firm is one of the largest IP law firms in the country, with more than 170 attorneys, scientific advisors and patent agents specializing in intellectual property litigation and all aspects of patent, trademark, copyright, trade secret, unfair competition, intellectual asset management, and technology and licensing agreements. Brinks routinely handles assignments in fields as diverse as electrical, chemical, mechanical, biotechnology, pharmaceutical, nanotechnology, Internet and computer technology, as well as in trademarks and brand names for a wide variety of products and services. For more information, please visit www.usebrinks.com.