Federal Judiciary

Defense Verdict in Lufkin Patent Case; Noninfringement and Claims Invalid

By Michael Smith

On October 7, a Lufkin jury in Judge Clark's court rendered a defense verdict in the Candela Corp. v. Polmar Medical Technologies case, 9:06cv277.  The jury found their neither accused product accused any of the asserted claims. 
Wait - the fun is just starting for these claims.
As for invalidity, the jury found that the defendant had shown by clear and convincing evidence that all four claims were invalid as anticipated by one of the four references listed (it found the defendant had not so shown with respect to the other three). The jury also found that the defendant had shown by clear and convincing evidence that two of the claims were invalid as obvious in light of four combinations of references.  The jury did decline to find for the defendant on a question re: enabling (assuming that they could follow a thicket of double negatives).
For those counting, that's back to back verdicts in Marshall and Lufkin of noninfringement and invalidity.

Full post as published by Eastern District of Texas Federal Court Practice on October 27, 2008 (boomark / email).