Vitalte Lifesciences, Inc. v. Bonds Therapeutics, LLC
Infringement action filed 28 Apr 2023 in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Ohio and closed 10 Oct 2023, with US11406806B2 asserted. Recorded basis of termination: case settled.
Case record
- Patent involved
- US11406806B2
- Application no.
- US15/901821
- Case no.
- 4:23-cv-00887
- Verdict cause
- Infringement action
- Court
- N.D. Ohio
- Court level
- District Court
- Case region
- Ohio
- Chief judge
- James S. Gwin
- Trial level
- First instance
- Filed – Closed
- 28 Apr 2023 – 10 Oct 2023
- Duration
- 165 days
- Basis of termination
- Case Settled
- Products & marks
- Atraumatic trocar apparatus, system and kit
- Validity challenges
- None recorded
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- 01Ranked prior artEvery hit source-linked
- 02Claim-level comparisonAgainst your own product
- 03Legal statusAcross 174 jurisdictions
Atraumatic trocar apparatus, system and kit
A method of atraumatic medication pellet delivery using an atraumatic trocar apparatus is described. The atraumatic trocar apparatus includes a cannula and an obturator. The method includes receiving the obturator by the cannula, wherein the obturator passes through the interior passage and exits through the anterior cannula opening so that the obturator anterior rounded tip extends past the anterior cannula end and at least one opening proximate to the anterior rounded tip also extends past the anterior cannula end. The method includes inserting the atraumatic trocar through an incision into subcutaneous tissue along an insertion path to an insertion length. Additionally, the method includes inserting one or more medication pellet into the medication slot of the inserted cannula and delivering the medication pellet(s) through the interior passage of the cannula to a subcutaneous delivery site by inserting the obturator into the posterior opening of the cannula.
- Legal status
- Active
- Granted
- 9 Aug 2022
- Est. expiry
- 18 Apr 2038
- Validity challenges
- None recorded
- Licences recorded
- None recorded
- Inventors
- VIRDEN, CHARLES P.
- Classification
- A61M37/00A61B17/34
- Prosecution counsel
- KERR IP GROUP, LLC
- Examiner
- SHAH, NILAY J
Parties of record
Vitalte Lifesciences, Inc.
- Core tech
- Not recorded
- Counsel
- Brandon D. Cox · Charles J. Andres · Elana B. Araj · Scott J. Bornstein
- Firm
- Greenberg Traurig LLP, Greenberg Traurig – New York, Greenberg Traurig – Washington
Bonds Therapeutics, LLC
- Core tech
- Not recorded
- Counsel
- Philip R. Bautista · Ryan O. White
- Firm
- Taft, Stettinius & Hollister LLP (ClevelAnd), Taft, Stettinius & Hollister LLP (Indianapolis)
Counsel of record
| Attorney | For | Role |
|---|---|---|
| Brandon D. Cox | Vitalte Lifesciences, Inc. | Plaintiff |
| Charles J. Andres | Vitalte Lifesciences, Inc. | Plaintiff |
| Elana B. Araj | Vitalte Lifesciences, Inc. | Plaintiff |
| Scott J. Bornstein | Vitalte Lifesciences, Inc. | Plaintiff |
| Philip R. Bautista | Bonds Therapeutics, LLC | Defendant |
| Ryan O. White | Bonds Therapeutics, LLC | Defendant |
Basis of termination
From the record · verbatim“Upon representation of counsel and parties that the above-captioned case has been settled between the parties, IT IS ORDERED that the docket be marked, “settled and dismissed with prejudice.” Parties are to file any subsequent order setting forth different terms and conditions relative to the settlement and dismissal of the within action as directed. Any such order shall supersede this order. FURTHER, the Court retains continuing jurisdiction to resolve disputes concerning the memorialization of this settlement agreement. See Kokkonen v. Guardian Life Ins. Co., 511 U.S. 375 (1994).”
Case 4:23-cv-00887 · N.D. Ohio · closed 10 October 2023
Related cases
Three questions this record usually leads to. Each one runs against the full litigation and patent corpus, and cites what it finds.
Frequently asked questions
What is case 4:23-cv-00887?
4:23-cv-00887 is a patent infringement action brought by Vitalte Lifesciences, Inc. against Bonds Therapeutics, LLC, filed on 28 Apr 2023 in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Ohio. The case closed on 10 October 2023.
Which patent was asserted in 4:23-cv-00887?
US11406806B2 (“Atraumatic trocar apparatus, system and kit”), assigned to SOUTHLAKE MEDICAL DEVICES LLC, currently active. The record also lists Atraumatic trocar apparatus, system and kit.
How was case 4:23-cv-00887 terminated?
The recorded basis of termination is case settled. The termination text reads: “Upon representation of counsel and parties that the above-captioned case has been settled between the parties, IT IS ORDERED that the docket be marked, “settled and dismissed with prejudice.” Parties are to file any subsequent order setting forth different terms and conditions relative to the settlement and dismissal of the within action as directed. Any such order shall supersede this order. FURTHER, the Court retains continuing jurisdiction to resolve disputes concerning the memorialization of this settlement agreement. See Kokkonen v. Guardian Life Ins. Co., 511 U.S. 375 (1994).”
What does dismissal with prejudice mean?
A dismissal with prejudice permanently ends the claims that were filed, so the same claims cannot be brought again against that defendant. It is the usual form when the parties have settled.
How long did case 4:23-cv-00887 take?
165 calendar days, from filing on 28 Apr 2023 to closure on 10 October 2023.
Who were the attorneys and the judge in 4:23-cv-00887?
Chief Judge James S. Gwin presided. Brandon D. Cox, Charles J. Andres, Elana B. Araj and Scott J. Bornstein are recorded as counsel for plaintiff Vitalte Lifesciences. Philip R. Bautista and Ryan O. White appear for defendant Bonds Therapeutics.
Disclaimer. This page reproduces publicly available court docket data for case 4:23-cv-00887 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.