Court of Appeals Overturns 2005 Patent Verdict Against Cordis
Posted on: Thursday, 15 January 2009, 12:23 CST
Cordis is very pleased with this significant Court decision.
The original jury verdict was rendered in
About Cordis Corporation
Cordis Corporation, a Johnson & Johnson company, is a worldwide leader in the development and manufacture of interventional vascular technology. Through the company's innovation, research and development, Cordis partners with interventional cardiologists worldwide to treat millions of patients who suffer from vascular disease.
More information about Cordis Corporation can be found at www.cordis.com.
SOURCE Cordis Corporation
Source: PR Newswire
Related Articles
- SEDONA Corporation Announces Recent Court Ruling
- Providence Service Corporation Comments on U.S. Court of Appeals' Decision to Uphold Federal Injunction Blocking California's 10% Cut in Medi-Cal Payments
- Vanguard Community Development Corporation Unveils Cameron Court State-of-the-Art Senior Living Center and Plans for 15th Anniversary Celebration
- Chesapeake Corporation Announces Bankruptcy Court Approval of Sale to Investor Group
- SolidWorks Corporation Co-Founds 'The CAD Academy' to Nurture Future Engineers
- Cordis Corporation to Emphasize Commitment to Interventional Cardiology at ACC.07
- Cordis Corporation to Establish New Innovative Research Center in Silicon Valley
- Campbell Rogers, M.D., International Expert in Interventional Cardiology and Vascular Conditions, Named Chief Technology Officer of Cordis Corporation
- Cordis Corporation to Develop Global Cardiac and Vascular Institute
- Cordis Endovascular, a Division of Cordis Corporation, Supports Peripheral Artery Disease Guidelines Released By the American Heart Association and American College of Cardiology
 |
 |
User Comments (1)
| 1. |
Posted by Duncan Williams on 01/18/2009, 09:33 This Federal Circuit ruling is a result of the new standard set forth in the Supreme Court ruling of KSR v Teleflex (2007). The asserted prior art contained all the elements of the claim arranged in the same order as the claim, but were distributed among two separate embodiments of the claim. Before KSR, there needed to be an explicit statement that the two embodiments should be combined in order to render the patent claim invalid. After KSR, no explicit motivation to combine the two embodiments is necessary to render a patent invalid for obviousness. KSR was issued after Boston Scientific won the jury trial, but before Cordis appealed to the Federal Circuit. Expect to see a lot more patents bite the dust in this manner in the near future compliments of KSR. For more info, see my post at http://duncanlaw71.com. |
RSS Feeds