Medtronic Files for Inter Partes Review of Endotach Intravascular Stent Patent

| Printer friendly version

On April 25, 2014, Medtronic, Inc. and Medtronic Vascular, Inc. (“Medtronic”) filed a second petition (the ’695 Petition) with the Patent Trial and Appeal Board requesting inter partes review of U.S. Patent No. 5,593,417 (“the ’417 Patent”).  Medtronic concurrently filed a motion requesting joinder of the ’695 Petition and Medtronic’s previously filed first petition requesting inter partes review of the ’417 Patent (the ’100 Petition).

The ’417 Patent is entitled “Intravascular Stent With Secure Mounting Means,” and lists a single inventor, Valentine J. Rhodes.  The ’417 Patent states that it relates to “expandable grafts and methods of use for opening restrictions therein, e.g., revascularizing stenotic arteries.”  Figures 1-3 from the ’417 Patent are shown below:

Figures 1-3 from the ’417 PatentThe ’695 Petition seeks review of claims 1, 2, 9, 10, and 13 of the ’417 Patent, the same claims challenged by the ’100 Petition.  The ’695 Petition discloses that one or more claims of the ’417 Patent have been asserted against Medtronic by Endotach LLC (“Endotach”) in a lawsuit filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California.  Endotach’s first amended complaint, filed on October 22, 2013, alleges that Acacia Patent Acquisition LLC assigned its rights in the ‘417 Patent to Endotach.  The complaint further alleges that “at least the Endurant AAA Stent Graft and Endurant II AAA Stent Graft. . .” infringe “at least claims 1, 2, and 13 of the ’417 Patent. . . .”  On April 24, 2014, the lawsuit was stayed by order of the court pending final resolution of the  inter partes review proceedings.

According to the ’695 Petition, Endotach is also asserting the ’417 Patent against Cook Medical Inc. in Endotach LLC v. Cook Medical Inc., No. 1:13-cv-1135 (S.D. Ind.) and W.L. Gore & Associates, Inc. in Endotach LLC v. W.L. Gore & Associates, Inc., No. 3:12-cv-00308 (N.D. Fla.).

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.