Defendant Does Not Infringe Due To Doctrine Of Permissible Repair

Morris James LLP
Contact

Drager Medical GmbH v. Allied Healthcare Products, Inc., C.A. No. 13-1656-SLR, March 27, 2015

Robinson, J.  Defendant’s motion for summary judgment of non-infringement is granted.

The disputed technology relates to a carbon dioxide absorber for a rebreather system.  The patent-in-suit is a combination patent with a connection head and a housing (“canister”) to be inserted and removed from the adapter of the rebreathing system.  Defendant does not sell the combination; it sells only the canister housing.  The patent exhaustion doctrine limits the rights that survive the authorized sale of a patented item.  The court concludes that the doctrine of permissible repair is implicated.  Replacement of a spent canister is a permissible repair.  Defendant’s sales of canisters therefore do not infringe.

DISCLAIMER: Because of the generality of this update, the information provided herein may not be applicable in all situations and should not be acted upon without specific legal advice based on particular situations.

© Morris James LLP | Attorney Advertising

Written by:

Morris James LLP
Contact
more
less

Morris James LLP on:

Reporters on Deadline

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
Custom Email Digest
- hide
- hide