Colibri Heart Valve, LLC v. Medtronic, Inc. et al.

8:20-cv-00847 C.D. Cal. Closed 2 patents
Get a prior-art report

Infringement action filed 4 May 2020 in the United States District Court for the Central District of California and closed 16 Mar 2023, with 2 patents asserted. Recorded basis of termination: mixed judgment.

Case recordPatsnap Litigation Data·

Case record

Patents involved
US9125739B2US8900294B2
Case no.
8:20-cv-00847
Verdict cause
Infringement action
Court
C.D. Cal.
Court level
District Court
Case region
California
Chief judge
None recorded
Trial level
First instance
Filed – Closed
4 May 2020 – 16 Mar 2023
Duration
1046 days
Basis of termination
Mixed Judgment
Products & marks
Method of controlled release of a percutaneous replacement heart valve · Percutaneous replacement heart valve and a delivery and implantation system
Source: Patsnap Litigation Data. Case 8:20-cv-00847, United States District Court for the Central District of California. Open this record in Eureka
Patsnap Eureka

Check this patent against your own product

Prior art, claim scope, infringement exposure and design-around routes. Every answer cites the records behind it.

Get an FTO claim chart
10,000 free credits to start
Patent at issue
US9125739B2 Inactive App. US14/253650

Percutaneous replacement heart valve and a delivery and implantation system

COLIBRI HEART VALVE LLC

A method of making a replacement heart valve device whereby a fragment of biocompatible tissue material is treated and soaked in one or more alcohol solutions and a solution of glutaraldehyde. The dried biocompatible tissue material is folded and rehydrated in such a way that forms a two- or three-leaflet/cusp valve without affixing of separate cusps or leaflets or cutting slits into the biocompatible tissue material to form the cusps or leaflets. After the biocompatible tissue material is folded, it is affixed at one or more points on the outer surface to the inner cavity or a stent.

Read claims and description in Eureka
Patent standing
Legal status
Inactive
Granted
8 Sep 2015
Earliest priority
13 Nov 2012
Est. expiry
4 Jan 2022
Validity challenges
3 on recordIPR2021-00775 · Other · filed by Edwards Lifesciences CorporationIPR2020-01649 · filed by Edwards Lifesciences CorporationIPR2020-01454 · Other · filed by Medtronic CoreValve LLC
Licences recorded
None recorded
Classification
A61F2/24A61B8/12A61F2/95A61F2/06A61F2/84A61F2/90
Prosecution counsel
Fox Rothschild LLP
Examiner
SWEET, THOMAS J
US9125739B2 patent drawing, figure 1
Fig. 1
US9125739B2 patent drawing, figure 2
Fig. 2
Get a novelty search report in Eureka
US8900294B2 Inactive App. US14/253656

Method of controlled release of a percutaneous replacement heart valve

FISH, R. DAVID

A method of making a replacement heart valve device whereby a fragment of biocompatible tissue material is treated and soaked in one or more alcohol solutions and a solution of glutaraldehyde. The dried biocompatible tissue material is folded and rehydrated in such a way that forms a two- or three-leaflet/cusp valve without affixing of separate cusps or leaflets or cutting slits into the biocompatible tissue material to form the cusps or leaflets. After the biocompatible tissue material is folded, it is affixed at one or more points on the outer surface to the inner cavity or a stent.

Read claims and description in Eureka
Patent standing
Legal status
Inactive
Granted
2 Dec 2014
Earliest priority
13 Nov 2012
Est. expiry
4 Jan 2022
Validity challenges
1 on recordIPR2020-01453 · filed by Medtronic CoreValve LLC
Licences recorded
None recorded
Classification
A61F2/84A61F2/24A61F2/95A61F2/90A61B8/12A61F2/06
Prosecution counsel
Fox Rothschild LLP
Examiner
SWEET, THOMAS J
Get a novelty search report in Eureka
Source: Patsnap patent data + case record. Bibliographic fields and drawings reproduced from the published patent document. Break down the claims
Parties & counsel

Parties of record

Plaintiff

Colibri Heart Valve, LLC

Core tech
A61F2/24A61B8/12A61F2/95A61F2/06
Counsel
Adam K. Mortara · Carolyn C. Chang · Hector Julian Ribera · John M. Hughes · John S. Phillips · Joseph C. Smith Jr. · Katherine E. Rhoades · Matthew R. Ford · Meg E. Fasulo · Mieke K. Malmberg · Ryan J. Marton · Steven E. Derringer · Taylor J. Kelson · Theodore D. Kwong
Firm
Barlit Beck LLP, Hilgers Graben, PLLC, Marton Ribera Schumann & Chang LLP, Mortara Law, Skiermont Derby LLP
View litigation record See its litigation pattern
Defendant

Medtronic, Inc.

Core tech
Not recorded
Counsel
Catherine Huang · James M. Heintz · Kathryn Bridget Riley · Mark D. Fowler · Martin M. Ellison · Matthew Ganas · Safraz Ishmael · Stanley J. Panikowski III
Firm
DLA Piper LLP, DLA Piper, LLP (US)
Also named
Medtronic, PLC
View litigation record See its litigation pattern

Counsel of record

AttorneyForRole
Adam K. MortaraColibri Heart Valve, LLCPlaintiff
Carolyn C. ChangColibri Heart Valve, LLCPlaintiff
Hector Julian RiberaColibri Heart Valve, LLCPlaintiff
John M. HughesColibri Heart Valve, LLCPlaintiff
John S. PhillipsColibri Heart Valve, LLCPlaintiff
Joseph C. Smith Jr.Colibri Heart Valve, LLCPlaintiff
Katherine E. RhoadesColibri Heart Valve, LLCPlaintiff
Matthew R. FordColibri Heart Valve, LLCPlaintiff
Meg E. FasuloColibri Heart Valve, LLCPlaintiff
Mieke K. MalmbergColibri Heart Valve, LLCPlaintiff
Ryan J. MartonColibri Heart Valve, LLCPlaintiff
Steven E. DerringerColibri Heart Valve, LLCPlaintiff
Taylor J. KelsonColibri Heart Valve, LLCPlaintiff
Theodore D. KwongColibri Heart Valve, LLCPlaintiff
Catherine HuangMedtronic, Inc.Defendant
James M. HeintzMedtronic, Inc.Defendant
Kathryn Bridget RileyMedtronic, Inc.Defendant
Mark D. FowlerMedtronic, Inc.Defendant
Martin M. EllisonMedtronic, Inc.Defendant
Matthew GanasMedtronic, Inc.Defendant
Safraz IshmaelMedtronic, Inc.Defendant
Stanley J. Panikowski IIIMedtronic, Inc.Defendant
Source: case record + Patsnap company data. Attorney names appear as recorded in the docket. Compare both portfolios
Outcome

Basis of termination

From the record · verbatim

"This action was tried to a jury beginning on January 31, 2023, in Courtroom 10A of the above-entitled Court, before the Honorable District Court Judge David O. Carter, with respect to claims 1-3 of U.S. Patent No. 8,900,294. On February 8, 2023, the jury returned a verdict in favor of Plaintiff Colibri Heart Valve LLC and against Defendant Medtronic CoreValve LLC on all questions. Dkt. 442. The Court previously had granted summary judgment of non-infringement in favor of Medtronic and against Colibri on claims 1, 2, 3, and 5 of U.S. Patent No. 9,125,739 and claim 4 of U.S. Patent No. 8,900,294. Dkt. 258 (entered November 17, 2021). NOW THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED THAT JUDGMENT IS HEREBY ENTERED IN THIS MATTER AS FOLLOWS: 1. Medtronic has induced infringement of claims 1-3 of U.S. Patent No. 8,900,294 (“the ’294 patent”). 2. Claims 1-3 of the ’294 patent are not invalid. 3. Final judgment of non-infringement is entered in Medtronic’s favor on claims 1, 2, 3, and 5 of U.S. Patent No. 9,125,739 and claim 4 of the ’294 patent. 4. Colibri shall recover $106,489,000 from Medtronic on the jury verdict, and Medtronic shall be liable for that amount. 5. Colibri shall recover prejudgment interest and costs under 35 U.S.C. § 284 in an amount to be fixed by the Court. 6. As provided in 28 U.S.C. § 1961, Colibri shall also recover post-judgment interest, running from the date of this Judgment until the Judgment is paid, on all amounts listed in paragraphs 4 and 5 above at a rate equal to the weekly average oneyear constant maturity Treasury yield for the calendar week preceding the date of this Judgment, compounded annually."

Case 8:20-cv-00847 · C.D. Cal. · closed 16 March 2023
Source: case record, verbatim. The quoted paragraph is the basis-of-termination text as filed.

Related cases

Three questions this record usually leads to. Each one runs against the full litigation and patent corpus, and cites what it finds.

Who else has this plaintiff sued? Every case naming Colibri Heart Valve, with the patent, court and outcome for each Could my product read on this patent? Claim-by-claim comparison against your own design What else is litigated in this field? The dispute map for implants & prostheses
FAQ

Frequently asked questions

What is case 8:20-cv-00847?

8:20-cv-00847 is a patent infringement action brought by Colibri Heart Valve, LLC against Medtronic, Inc., filed on 4 May 2020 in the United States District Court for the Central District of California. The case closed on 16 March 2023.

Which patents were asserted in 8:20-cv-00847?

US9125739B2 (“Percutaneous replacement heart valve and a delivery and implantation system”), assigned to COLIBRI HEART VALVE LLC, currently inactive; US8900294B2 (“Method of controlled release of a percutaneous replacement heart valve”), assigned to FISH, R. DAVID, currently inactive. The record also lists Method of controlled release of a percutaneous replacement heart valve and Percutaneous replacement heart valve and a delivery and implantation system.

How was case 8:20-cv-00847 terminated?

The recorded basis of termination is mixed judgment. The termination text reads: "This action was tried to a jury beginning on January 31, 2023, in Courtroom 10A of the above-entitled Court, before the Honorable District Court Judge David O. Carter, with respect to claims 1-3 of U.S. Patent No. 8,900,294. On February 8, 2023, the jury returned a verdict in favor of Plaintiff Colibri Heart Valve LLC and against Defendant Medtronic CoreValve LLC on all questions. Dkt. 442. The Court previously had granted summary judgment of non-infringement in favor of Medtronic and against Colibri on claims 1, 2, 3, and 5 of U.S. Patent No. 9,125,739 and claim 4 of U.S. Patent No. 8,900,29

What does summary judgment mean?

Summary judgment resolves claims without a trial because the court finds no genuine dispute of material fact on those claims.

How long did case 8:20-cv-00847 take?

1046 calendar days, from filing on 4 May 2020 to closure on 16 March 2023.

Who were the attorneys and the judge in 8:20-cv-00847?

Adam K. Mortara, Carolyn C. Chang, Hector Julian Ribera, John M. Hughes, John S. Phillips, Joseph C. Smith Jr., Katherine E. Rhoades, Matthew R. Ford, Meg E. Fasulo, Mieke K. Malmberg, Ryan J. Marton, Steven E. Derringer, Taylor J. Kelson and Theodore D. Kwong are recorded as counsel for plaintiff Colibri Heart Valve. Catherine Huang, James M. Heintz, Kathryn Bridget Riley, Mark D. Fowler, Martin M. Ellison, Matthew Ganas, Safraz Ishmael and Stanley J. Panikowski III appear for defendant Medtronic.

Answers reproduce fields from the case record for 8:20-cv-00847 and do not constitute legal advice. Ask your own question
Browse related dockets
Cases in C.D. Cal. Cases on implants & prostheses All patent litigation records

Disclaimer. This page reproduces publicly available court docket data for case 8:20-cv-00847 and is provided for general information and reference only. It is not legal advice and must not be relied upon as such.

Docket data has limits. Records are drawn from a snapshot and may lag the live docket. Sealed filings, amended complaints, counterclaims and post-closure motions may not be reflected. Party names, attorney names and firm affiliations are reproduced as recorded and may contain omissions. Where a field is absent from the record, this page marks it as not recorded rather than inferring a value.

No characterisation of the parties or the outcome. This page reports what the record contains. Nothing here should be read as an assertion that any party infringed, that any patent is valid or invalid, that any settlement occurred, or that any party prevailed.

No FTO or validity opinion. Nothing on this page constitutes a freedom-to-operate, novelty, validity or infringement opinion. Any decision touching a live patent dispute should be verified independently and reviewed with qualified patent counsel.