IP News

In Therasense, Inc. v. Becton, Dickinson & Co., Nos. 2008-1511, -1512, -1513, -1514, -1595 (Fed. Cir. Jan. 25, 2010), the Federal Circuit affirmed the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California's decision that a patent was unenforceable for inequitable conduct due to a failure to disclose statements made to the European Patent Office (“EPO”) concerning a European counterpart outside the patent-in-suit's family that included some common inventors.

Co-plaintiff Abbott owns U.S. Patents 5,820,551 (“the '551 patent”) and 4,545,382 (“the '382 patent”). The claims of the '382 patent are directed to sensors for testing fluids by generating an electrical current in the fluid. The '551 patent is directed to a system for testing blood using sensors similar to those disclosed by the '382 patent, with dependent claims focusing on the use of strips for testing blood sugar (primarily for use by diabetics). The '551 patent is not a descendant of the '382 patent, nor does it have an identical set of inventors, though it does share two inventors with those listed on the '382 patent. The district court found that the '551 patent was obvious in light of the '382 patent and U.S. Patent No. 4,225,410 (“the '410 patent”).