'Patent Troll' Turned Away By PTO In St. Jude Case
This article was originally published in The Gray Sheet
A patent review board found that a remote monitoring patent owned by a “non-practicing entity” was invalid due to obviousness. So-called "patent troll" cases had been relatively rare in the device arena, but there has been an increase in activity.
You may also be interested in...
The inter partes review process, which provides a non-court strategy for invalidating patents, could conceivably come to an end depending on the Supreme Court's ruling in a case this spring. Device firms have been wary of the IPR process, which can weaken patent protections, but attorneys point out that it has also been a helpful tool in fighting against the growing threat of patent trolls in medtech. While bets are for upholding the system, legal experts say device companies could fall back to other processes previously used to stop patent trolls.
Our most popular stories in December included an in-depth exploration of best practices in setting up an effective "war room" during an FDA inspection; a detailed look at user-fee reauthorization proposals early in the negotiation process; updates from the agency's Office of Regulatory Affairs, Office of Compliance, and Office of Device Evaluation; and more.
Patent attorneys suggest lawsuits from firms that buy up device patents purely to pursue litigation, which appears to have occurred recently with Medtronic’s kyphoplasty patents, may become a more common occurrence.