April 9, 2010
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed on April 1 a lower court’s dismissal of a declaratory judgment action against the holder of patents related to a device for treating chronic wounds. The court rejected arguments that lawsuits initiated by the patent holder after the declaratory judgment action was filed created a controversy under the Declaratory Judgment Act. Kinetic Concepts, Inc. holds rights in five patents; Innovative Therapies, Inc., established by several former Kinetic employees, sought a declaration in 2007 that Kinetic’s patents were invalid. Kinetic moved to dismiss the action for lack of jurisdiction under the Declaratory Judgment Act. A district court judge found there was no actual controversy, and dismissed the claim. Innovative appealed, but Judge Pauline Newman rejected Innovative’s arguments that the district court had erred in its finding that certain factors did not establish the existence of a controversy of “sufficient immediacy and reality,” to establish jurisdiction under MedImmune, Inc. v. Genentech, Inc. Kinetic is represented in this matter by Finnegan partner Donald Dunner.
Press Release
September 11, 2024
Press Release
Finnegan Named a “True Trailblazer” for Its Continued Commitment to Mansfield Certification Process
August 16, 2024
Due to international data regulations, we’ve updated our privacy policy. Click here to read our privacy policy in full.
We use cookies on this website to provide you with the best user experience. By accepting cookies, you agree to our use of cookies. Please note that if you opt not to accept or if you disable cookies, the “Your Finnegan” feature on this website will be disabled as well. For more information on how we use cookies, please see our Privacy Policy.
Finnegan is thrilled to announce the launch of our new blog, Ad Law Buzz, devoted solely to breaking news, developments, trends, and analysis in advertising law.