Becton Wins Again On Summary Judgment

Back in 2003 MBO sued Becton, Dickinson for infringement of Reissue Patent No. 36,885 directed to a safety syringe design.  Becton had won several District Court victories along the way, only to have them reversed (twice) by the Federal Circuit.  Once again, Becton has prevailed at the District Court.  Only time will tell if the decision holds up. 

Here’s a quick recap of the case history: 

The claims were originally construed by Judge Lindsay in 2005, but those constructions were primarily reversed by the Federal Circuit.  Becton then filed a motion for summary judgment of invalidity based on the recapture rule.  That motion was granted by Judge Tauro, but was also reversed by the Federal Circuit.  The case then found its way to Judge Stearns, who granted Becton’s most recent motion for summary judgment, this time for non-infringement. 

In the ruling Judge Stearns noted several structural differences between the claims and the accused product including the accused product’s lack of a retractable needle, failure to “immediately” preclude needle-stick injury, and lack of a spring urged flange over the body front.  The court also noted that MBO failed to prove direct infringement regarding activation of the needle protection device, a common problem with medical device claims that are dependent upon activity of a medical practitioner.  The court also found that MBO failed to show infringement through doctrine of equivalents. 

Now let’s see what the Federal Circuit does this time around. 

MBO Labs., Inc. v. Becton, Dickinson & Co., 03-10038-RGS (D. Mass. May 6, 2011)

03-10038-RGS