Medtech Insight is part of Informa PLC

This site is operated by a business or businesses owned by Informa PLC and all copyright resides with them. Informa PLC’s registered office is 5 Howick Place, London SW1P 1WG. Registered in England and Wales. Number 8860726.

This copy is for your personal, non-commercial use. For high-quality copies or electronic reprints for distribution to colleagues or customers, please call +44 (0) 20 3377 3183

Printed By

UsernamePublicRestriction
UsernamePublicRestriction

Palomar v. Alma Lasers

This article was originally published in The Gray Sheet

Executive Summary

Alma will pay royalties on past and future sales of its light-based hair removal systems to resolve patent infringement charges filed by Palomar in Massachusetts federal court. Palomar accused Alma's Harmony, Soprano, Soprano XL andSonata systems of infringing its '844 and '568 patents. "After a nine-month period at a slightly higher rate, Alma Lasers will pay a 7.5% ongoing royalty rate," Alma says. The firm also has agreed to change the appearance of its Harmony and Aria systems to avoid confusion with Palomar systems and will pay 11% for past patent and trade dress infringement. Cutera and Lumenis have settled similar cases with Palomar (1"The Gray Sheet" June 12, 2006, p. 12)...

You may also be interested in...



Cutera Settles Palomar Hair Removal Laser Suit For $22 Mil. Plus Royalties

Palomar plans to enforce its Anderson patents against additional makers of laser and lamp-based hair removal systems following a successful settlement June 5 with competitor Cutera for $22 mil. plus royalties

QUOTED. 22 January 2020. Steve Niedelman.

Steve Niedelman of the law firm King & Spalding gave manufacturers a few words of advice when prepping their so-called front rooms, where US FDA investigators do the majority of their work during facility inspections. See what he said here.

FDA’s Follow-Up Sunscreen Trial Shows More Of The Same: Absorption Of All Tested UV Filters

The FDA emphasizes that findings from its second, more extensive clinical study on the absorption potential of sunscreen active ingredients are not in themselves signals that the UV filters are unsafe. However, they portend heavy work ahead for industry if the ingredients are to remain GRASE and available for use in OTC sunscreen drug products stateside.  
 
UsernamePublicRestriction

Register

MT024667

Ask The Analyst

Please Note: You can also Click below Link for Ask the Analyst
Ask The Analyst

Your question has been successfully sent to the email address below and we will get back as soon as possible. my@email.address.

All fields are required.

Please make sure all fields are completed.

Please make sure you have filled out all fields

Please make sure you have filled out all fields

Please enter a valid e-mail address

Please enter a valid Phone Number

Ask your question to our analysts

Cancel