This is the property of the Daily Journal Corporation and fully protected by copyright. It is made available only to Daily Journal subscribers for personal or collaborative purposes and may not be distributed, reproduced, modified, stored or transferred without written permission. Please click "Reprint" to order presentation-ready copies to distribute to clients or use in commercial marketing materials or for permission to post on a website. and copyright (showing year of publication) at the bottom.

Intellectual Property
Patent Infringement
Nucleic Acid Testing

Gen-Probe Inc., a Delaware corporation v. Becton Dickinson and Company, a New Jersey corporation

Published: Nov. 10, 2012 | Result Date: Sep. 28, 2012 | Filing Date: Jan. 1, 1900 |

Case number: 09-cv-2319 BEN (NLS) and 10-cv-0602 BEN (NLS) Summary Judgment –  For Plaintiff

Facts

Hologic Inc. was a leading developer, manufacturer, and supplier of premium diagnostics, medical imaging systems, and surgical products. Its subsidiary, Gen-Probe, filed a patent infringement suit against Becton, Dickinson and Co. (BD). At summary judgment, Gen-Probe argued that BD's ProbeTec Qx CT/GC assays on the BD VIPER System with XTR Technology and the use of BD'S GBS assays on the BD MAX System infringed three six of Gen-Probe's patents covering automated nucleic acid testing and related products. Gen-Probe also sought summary judgment on BD's invalidity defenses. BD sought summary judgment that Gen-Probe's patents were invalid, that certain patents were not infringed, and that Gen-Probe lacked standing to sue on certain patents.

Result

The Court granted-in-part and denied-in-part the parties' cross-motions for summary judgment. The Court granted Gen-Probe's motion for partial summary judgment that a BD cap product infringed one patent, and that the use of BD's VIPER XTR and BD MAX instruments with certain assays directly infringed three other Gen-Probe patents, and also granted summary judgment on two invalidity arguments that BD had elected not to pursue. The judge otherwise denied Gen-Probe's motion for summary judgment of contributory and induced infringement and patent validity. The Court granted BD's motion for summary judgment that two patents were not infringed, and denied summary judgment on BD's invalidity defenses and motion for lack of standing. The case is proceeding to trial on issues of liability including infringement, invalidity, and inequitable conduct, as well as on the issue of whether Gen-Probe has standing to assert certain patents.


#111541

For reprint rights or to order a copy of your photo:

Email jeremy@reprintpros.com for prices.
Direct dial: 949-702-5390