Bonutti Skeletal’s Joint Infringement Claim Dismissed

| Printer friendly version

On November 14, 2013, the United States District Court for the District of Delaware denied in part and granted in part defendant ConforMIS, Inc.’s motion to dismiss Bonutti Skeletal Innovations, LLC’s joint infringement and willful infringement claims.  According to ConforMIS’s complaint in a related case, Bonutti Skeletal is a subsidiary of Acacia Research Corp.  According to ConforMIS’s website, ConforMIS provides knee implants and instrumentation.

On September 10, 2012, Bonutti Skeletal filed its complaint against ConforMIS for direct and joint infringement of U.S. Patent 7,806,896, entitled “Knee Arthroplasty Method.”  Figure 1 from the ‘896 patent is shown below.

Figure 1 from the ‘896 patent

Bonutti Skeletal’s joint infringement claim alleges that ConforMIS infringed the ‘896 patent by “encouraging, promoting and inducing surgeons, physicians and medical professionals to use and implant within the United States ConforMIS knee implants and/or to use ConforMIS surgical instruments in a manner that practices the method of at least one claim of the ‘896 patent.”

ConforMIS’s  motion to dismiss argued that Bonutti Skeletal’s joint infringement and willful infringement claims failed to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. The court denied ConforMIS’s motion with respect to the willful infringement claim. However, the court granted ConforMIS’s motion to dismiss with respect to the joint infringement claim, stating that “[i]n order to adequately plead joint infringement, a complaint must set forth facts from which the court may infer that one party so thoroughly controls the entire performance of the claimed method that the steps that the party does not complete are nevertheless attributable to that party.”

Bonutti Skeletal has filed lawsuits against other defendants relating to the ‘896 patent, including against DePuy Mitek, Inc., Biomet, Inc., Smith & Nephew, Inc., Zimmer, Inc., and  Wright Medical Group. With exception of the lawsuit against Biomet, which has been  dismissed with prejudice,  these lawsuits remain pending.  In addition, Biomet and ConforMIS have filed complaints against Bonutti in separate lawsuits.

Leave a Reply

By using this blog, you agree and understand that no information is being provided in the context of any attorney-client relationship. You further agree and understand that nothing herein is intended to be legal advice. This blog is solely informational in nature, and is not intended as, and should not be used as, a substitute for competent legal advice from a retained and licensed attorney in your state. Knobbe Martens LLP makes no representations or warranties as to the accuracy, completeness, timeliness or availability of the information in this blog. Knobbe Martens LLP will not be liable for any injury or damages relating to your use of, or access to, any such information. Knobbe Martens LLP undertakes no obligation to correct or update information on this blog, which may be incorrect or become incorrect or out of date over time. Knobbe Martens LLP reserves the right to alter or delete content or information on the blog at any time. This blog contains links and references to other websites and publications that you may find of interest. Knobbe Martens LLP does not control, promote, endorse or otherwise have any affiliation with any other websites or publications unless those websites or publications expressly state such an affiliation. Knobbe Martens LLP further has no responsibility for, and makes no representations regarding, the content, accuracy or any other aspect of the information in such websites or publications.