Wolf Greenfield’s litigation team secured summary judgment of no patent infringement for our client The Jackson Laboratory
June 2, 2010Chelsea A. Loughran and Michael N. Rader
On June 1, 2010, Wolf Greenfield’s litigation team secured summary judgment of no patent infringement for our client The Jackson Laboratory, a leading biomedical research institution and repository for laboratory mice.
The suit, brought by The Central Institute for Experimental Animals (CIEA) in the Northern District of California, alleges infringement of a patent directed to the creation of transgenic immunodeficient mice by breeding particular progenitor mice.
The Court granted summary judgment in favor of Jackson, ruling that Jackson does not infringe CIEA’s patent either literally or under the doctrine of equivalents.
Earlier this year, the Court had adopted Jackson’s proposed definition for a mouse strain identified in the asserted patent claims. Under this definition, CIEA conceded that it could not prove literal infringement. Jackson’s summary judgment motion addressed the doctrine of equivalents.
The Court agreed with Jackson that the mouse strain used by Jackson could not, as a matter of law, infringe under the doctrine of equivalents because it was disclosed, but not literally claimed, in CIEA’s patent. Under prevailing Federal Circuit precedent, disclosed-but-unclaimed subject matter is dedicated to the public and cannot be reached under the doctrine of equivalents.
Wolf Greenfield’s litigation team for this case includes shareholder Michael Rader and associate Chelsea Loughran.
Click below for a copy of the Court’s ruling.
View as PDF