Skip to main content

Are you a legal professional? Visit our professional site

Search for legal issues
For help near (city, ZIP code or county)
Please enter a legal issue and/or a location

Patent Infringement Suit Re Automated Biopsy Instruments, Plus Antidumping Duty Case

Article Placeholder Image
By FindLaw Staff on August 13, 2010 5:58 PM

Thai I-Mei Frozen Foods Co., Ltd. v. US, 09-1516, concerned a challenge to the Court of International Trade's decision reversing and remanding Commerce's first remand determination, in an anti-dumping duty case, involving frozen and canned warmwater shrimp from Thailand.  In reversing, the court held that the Commerce's statement of a general preference for exclusion of sales outside the ordinary course of trade where, as here, the date are for like products sold by other respondents, is reasonable.  Thus, Commerce reasonably determined that in this case, where such data were readily available, and indeed had been used for the other two respondents, it was reasonable to make its determination excluding sales outside the ordinary course of trade.

Baran v. Med. Device Technologies, Inc., 10-1058, involved a doctor's patent infringement suit alleging infringement of certain '797 and '798 patents, directed to automated biopsy instruments.  In affirming district court's entry of judgment in favor of defendant as to both patents, the court held that, because district court's construction of "resealably," or related construction of "first connector means" and "second connector means," will not be disturbed, plaintiff's stipulation of noninfringement of the '798 patent remains effective.  Also, district court's determination that no reasonable juror could find that defendant's device satisfied the means-plus-function limitation of "release means for retaining the guide in the charged position," is sufficient to affirm its judgment of noninfringement.  Lastly, there is no merit to plaintiff's argument that the district court erred by striking portions of the declaration that he submitted in opposition to defendant's motion for summary judgment.

Related Resources:

Find a Lawyer

More Options