DJ Action Against Wound Treatment Patentee Properly Dismissed for Lack of Jurisdiction

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.