TARİH : 09.06.2009  
======================================

In the above case the Federal Circuit held that the district court correctly granted Summary Judgement (SJ) of non-infringement and SJ of invalidity, did not commit clear error in awarding attorneys’ fees, and did not abuse its discretion in granting Rule 11 sanctions- all in favour of Alaris Medical Systems, Inc.

The technology in this case concerns medical valves used in the transmission of fluids to or from a medical patient, such as when using an IV. Prior techniques involved the insertion of an external needle into a side port that connected to the main IV line, but this technique had several problems. ICU Medical, Inc. (ICU) attempted to overcome these problems by inventing a medical valve that receives fluid from a medical implement (e.g., a syringe) without the use of an external needle. The medical implement compresses a seal on the valve to create a fluid pathway from the medical implement through the valve and into a patient’s IV line. Initially, ICU sued Alaris for patent infringement, asserting only one patent and its so-called “spikeless” claims. ICU then filed for a temporary restraining order (TRO), which the district court denied because Alaris presented substantial questions of invalidity for the asserted spikeless claims. Subsequently, ICU amended its complaint to assert claims from three other patents. After a series of detailed orders and findings, the district court granted SJ of non-infringement of the spike claims, SJ of invalidity of the spikeless and tube claims, and attorneys’ fees and Rule 11 sanctions. ICU appealed all three judgements