OAKLAND, Calif.—A Northern District of California jury last week rejected claims of patent infringement made by Baxter Healthcare Corporation and DEKA Products, Ltd, against the Liberty Peritoneal Dialysis (PD) Cycler designed and produced by its wholly owned subsidiary, Fresenius Medical Care Holdings, Inc. The patents related to PD cycler pump design.
Baxter had claimed that Fresenius Medical Care's Liberty PD machine infringed a Baxter and a DEKA patent, which both involve the design of the pump that fills and drains PD solution from patients. The DEKA patent is most closely related to Baxter's Home Choice PD cycler that was originally developed by DEKA in the late 1980s. Fresenius Medical Care demonstrated that the Liberty Cycler utilizes mechanical means to operate the pump that fills and drains patients and was not a copy of Baxter's Home Choice cycler.
The jury returned a unanimous verdict on July 28 of no infringement on every count after deliberating less than a day in Oakland, Calif., following a nearly four week trial.
"We are gratified that the jury has sided with Fresenius Medical Care in its defense of its Liberty Cycler against charges of patent infringement. We knew all along that these claims were baseless and without merit," said Juanita Brooks, Fish & Richardson principal and lead trial counsel on the case. "This is a victory not only for Fresenius Medical Care, but for the thousands of individuals undergoing dialysis because of chronic kidney failure who will continue to have access to Fresenius Medical Care's unparalleled track record of safety and performance for its services, equipment and supplies."
This jury verdict comes on the heels of a different win for Fresenius Medical Care related to other pending litigation with Baxter. On July 20, 2010, the Patent Office's Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences dismissed Baxter's request for a rehearing of the appeal of the reexamination decision invalidating the claims of the sole surviving patent, 5,247,434, in litigation over Baxter's patents on hemodialysis (HD) machines with touch screens. Therefore, the final outcome of the Patent Office reexamination proceeding is that the '434 patent claims in suit are unpatentable and subject to cancellation. Two other patents (5,744,027 and 6,284,131) in the 2006 HD case were previously found invalid by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit and in parallel reexamination proceedings. Baxter may file further appeals on the '434 patent. This case and the reexam proceedings were also handled by Fish & Richardson.
"We are disappointed in the jury’s verdict, given the strong evidence presented to the jury," Baxter said in a statement. "We are evaluating our options to appeal this decision, in order to protect the unique innovation in Baxter’s HomeChoice peritoneal dialysis cycler."
