The America Invents Act of 2011 was designed to provide a durable overhaul of the U.S. patent system, but the inter partes review process has drawn fire from inventors as a patent-killing machine. The Senate is considering a new bill to address some of these concerns, but witnesses at a hearing this week were anything but united in their assessment of the status quo, making it difficult to forecast the fate of this latest effort at patent reform.
The America Invents Act of 2011 was designed to provide a durable overhaul of the U.S. patent system, but the inter partes review (IPR) process has drawn fire from inventors as a patent-killing machine. The Senate is considering a new bill to address some of these concerns, but witnesses at a hearing this week were anything but united in their assessment of the status quo, making it difficult to forecast the fate of this latest effort at patent reform.
Apple Inc., of Cupertino, Calif., has prevailed over Masimo Corp., in a ruling at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, an outcome that invalidated several Masimo patents for physiological monitoring. However, the two companies are not finished with each other yet as the International Trade Commission has yet to rule on a similar case that could foreclose importation of Apple devices on grounds of patent infringement.
Edwards Lifesciences Inc., has joined Apple Inc., and several tech companies in suing the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) over PTO’s administration of the inter partes review (IPR) process in a lawsuit that reached the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. The court recently rejected the challenge as to whether the PTO is empowered by the statute to determine whether an IPR could be instituted, but the agency may be forced to engage in the clunky rulemaking process to formally encode the so-called Fintiv standard for acceptance of IPRs.
Alivecor Inc. has nudged the U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC) into issuing a limited exclusion order for products by Apple Inc. that are said to violate patents held by Alivecor, but there is one more stage gate to go for Alivecor. The ITC order notes that the exclusion won’t go into force until resolution of an inter partes review (IPR) involving the two firms, a process that could devour as much as a year and a half before a resolution is available.
For the second time in recent weeks, Apple Inc. has come out on the losing side of a patent dispute adjudicated by the U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC), this time at the hands of Masimo Corp. While an ITC administrative law judge (ALJ) found for Masimo in connection with one of the company’s patents, Cupertino, Calif.-based Apple was cleared of any infringement in connection with four other Masimo patents, and the ITC has yet to officially declare what sort of remedy it will impose on Apple over the dispute with Irvine, Calif.-based Masimo.
Intellectual property continues to be a pressing issue for makers of medical devices and diagnostics as demonstrated by the ongoing patent dispute between Alivecor Inc., and Apple Inc., which is being waged on multiple fronts. An administrative judge at the International Trade Commission (ITC) sided with Alivecor in the dispute, opening the door to an import ban while the Patent Trial and Appeal Board found that 20 of the claims in the disputed patent are unpatentable.
Patent disputes between developers of medical software might not have kept pace with the rate of disputes over in vitro diagnostic patents, but Alivecor Inc. and Apple Inc. are doing their share to keep software patents in the news. In the latest development, Mountain View, Calif.-based Alivecor reported that it won an initial determination of infringement of one of its patents by Apple Inc., of Cupertino, Calif., which could lead to an exclusion order for Apple watches if the case ultimately goes Alivecor’s way.
The FDA’s device center reported the addition of four device types to the ranks of class II devices, including one each for de novo petitions by Apple Inc., of Cupertino, Calif., and Roche Molecular Systems Inc., of Pleasanton, Calif.
This year saw continued advances in smartwatches as they increasingly move from wellness assistants to medical monitors. Nowhere has that been clearer than in cardiovascular health, where multiple wearables now allow users to quickly detect atrial fibrillation, a notoriously shy condition previously only detectable in early stages by chance in a physician’s office or by wearing a cumbersome Holter monitor for 24 to 48 hours.
