Abbott Diabetes Care Inc & Ors v Dexcom Inc & Ors [2024] EWHC 1664 (Pat) (28 June 2024)

Abbott Diabetes Care Inc & Ors v Dexcom Inc & Ors [2024] EWHC 1664 (Pat) (28 June 2024)

The court found that the skilled team, comprising a design/mechanical engineer and an electronics engineer, would have found the claimed invention of EP044 obvious in light of the prior art (notably Heller, Ethelfeld, and Fennell) and common general knowledge. The patent did not disclose a technical advance that...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2024] EWHC 1664 (Pat)
Parties
Claimant: Abbott Diabetes Care Inc.; Claimant: Abbott Laboratories Vascular Enterprises LP; Claimant: Abbott Ireland; Claimant/part 20 Defendant: Abbott Diabetes Care Limited; Claimant: Abbott Diagnostics GmbH; Claimant/part 20 Defendant: Abbott Laboratories Limited; Defendant/part 20 Claimant: Dexcom Incorporated; Defendant/part 20 Claimant: Dexcom International Limited; Defendant: Dexcom Operating Limited; Defendant: Dexcom (UK) Distribution Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
28 June 2024
Procedural Posture
Patent Infringement and Validity Proceedings / High Court (patents Court) Trial Judgment
Outcome
EP044 held invalid for obviousness; claim for infringement dismissed.
Legal Topics
Patent Infringement, Patent Validity, Obviousness, Added Matter, Insufficiency, Continuous Glucose Monitoring (cgm) Devices
Intellectual Property Patents Patent Infringement Patent Validity Obviousness Added Matter Insufficiency Continuous Glucose Monitoring (cgm) Devices

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Abbott Diabetes Care Inc.

Claimant

Abbott Laboratories Vascular Enterprises LP

Claimant

Abbott Ireland

Claimant

Abbott Diabetes Care Limited

Claimant/part 20 Defendant

Abbott Diagnostics GmbH

Claimant

Abbott Laboratories Limited

Claimant/part 20 Defendant

Dexcom Incorporated

Defendant/part 20 Claimant

Dexcom International Limited

Defendant/part 20 Claimant

Dexcom Operating Limited

Defendant

Dexcom (UK) Distribution Limited

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Patent Infringement and Validity Proceedings / High Court (patents Court) Trial Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Dexcom G7 infringes EP 3 730 044 B1 (EP044)
  2. 2 Whether EP044 is invalid for obviousness over prior art (Heller, Ethelfeld, Fennell)
  3. 3 Whether claim 5 of EP044 contains added matter

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the skilled team, comprising a design/mechanical engineer and an electronics engineer, would have found the claimed invention of EP044 obvious in light of the prior art (notably Heller, Ethelfeld, and Fennell) and common general knowledge. The patent did not disclose a technical advance that would not have occurred to the skilled team. The alleged added matter in claim 5 was not established, and the insufficiency attacks failed. However, the patent was held invalid for obviousness. The Dexcom G7 product would have infringed EP044 if it were valid, but as the patent is invalid, there is no actionable infringement.

Court Disposition

EP044 held invalid for obviousness; claim for infringement dismissed.

Orders

  • Declaration that EP044 is invalid for obviousness over the prior art.
  • Claim for infringement of EP044 by Dexcom G7 dismissed.