Abbott Diabetes Care Inc & Ors v Dexcom Incorporated & Ors

Abbott Diabetes Care Inc & Ors v Dexcom Incorporated & Ors

EP627 is anticipated by the Dexcom STS Guide and thus invalid; not obvious over Bunte. If valid, Dexcom's G6, G7, and D1 would infringe. EP223 is anticipated by Gejdos and not obvious over Lebel; claims 7/9 are obvious if claim 1 is invalid. If valid, Dexcom's devices would not infringe on the main construction, but would infringe on an alternative, broader construction. EP539 as proposed to be amended is not allowable due to extension of protection and lack of clarity. EP159 and EP539 (as amended) are anticipated by Brauker and Shariati, or in the alternative, obvious over those and the STS-7 and Navigator Guides. If valid, Abbott's FSL2 and FSL3 would infringe. The judgment turns on...

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
11 October 2024
Procedural Posture
Patent Infringement and Revocation (multi Party, Multi Patent) / First Instance, Post Trial Judgment
Outcome
All patents in suit found invalid on at least one ground; no injunctions or damages awarded.
Legal Topics
Patent Infringement, Patent Validity, Obviousness, Novelty, Amendment of Patent Claims, Continuous Glucose Monitoring (cgm) Devices
Intellectual Property Patents Medical Devices Patent Infringement Patent Validity Obviousness Novelty Amendment of Patent Claims +1 more

Case Brief

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 3 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 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 Revocation (multi Party, Multi Patent) / First Instance, Post Trial Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Dexcom's CGM systems infringe Abbott's patents EP627 and EP223
  2. 2 Whether Abbott's CGM systems infringe Dexcom's patents EP159 and EP539
  3. 3 Validity of EP627, EP223, EP159, and EP539 (novelty, inventive step, sufficiency, clarity, extension of protection)

Ratio Decidendi

EP627 is anticipated by the Dexcom STS Guide and thus invalid; not obvious over Bunte. If valid, Dexcom's G6, G7, and D1 would infringe. EP223 is anticipated by Gejdos and not obvious over Lebel; claims 7/9 are obvious if claim 1 is invalid. If valid, Dexcom's devices would not infringe on the main construction, but would infringe on an alternative, broader construction. EP539 as proposed to be amended is not allowable due to extension of protection and lack of clarity. EP159 and EP539 (as amended) are anticipated by Brauker and Shariati, or in the alternative, obvious over those and the STS-7 and Navigator Guides. If valid, Abbott's FSL2 and FSL3 would infringe. The judgment turns on...

Court Disposition

All patents in suit found invalid on at least one ground; no injunctions or damages awarded.

Orders

  • EP627 declared invalid for anticipation; no relief for Abbott.
  • EP223 declared invalid for anticipation; claims 7/9 also obvious if claim 1 invalid; no relief for Abbott.