Glaukos Corporation v. Ivantis Inc.
Published: May 3, 2019 | Result Date: Mar. 19, 2019 | Filing Date: Apr. 14, 2018 |Case number: 8:18-cv-00620-JVS-JDE Summary Judgment – Plaintiff
Judge
Court
CD CA
Attorneys
Plaintiff
Lisa S. Glasser
(Irell & Manella LLP)
Morgan Chu
(Irell & Manella LLP)
David C. McPhie
(Irell & Manella LLP)
Stephen M. Payne
(Irell & Manella LLP)
Defendant
Ajay S. Krishnan
(Keker, Van Nest & Peters LLP)
Leo L. Lam
(Keker, Van Nest & Peters LLP)
David J. Silbert
(Keker, Van Nest & Peters LLP)
Robert A. Van Nest Jr.
(Keker, Van Nest & Peters LLP)
Facts
Glaukos Corp. filed a patent infringement lawsuit against Ivantis Inc. and Ivantis filed patent infringement counterclaims.
Contentions
PLAINTIFF'S CONTENTIONS: Glaukos contended that its iStent inject product, which reduces IOP in adult patients with mild to moderate primary open-angle glaucoma, did not infringe Ivantis' Berlin Patents.
DEFENDANT'S CONTENTIONS: Ivantis contended that the Glaukos iStent inject product infringed its Berlin Patents.
Result
The court granted Glaukos' motion for summary judgment of non-infringement. It found that the dimensions and characteristics of the iStent inject are different from the device claimed as an invention in the Berlin patents, and therefore, no reasonable juror could find infringement.
For reprint rights or to order a copy of your photo:
Email
jeremy@reprintpros.com
for prices.
Direct dial: 949-702-5390