DECN SUBSIDIARIES APPEAL NEVADA DISTRICT COURT RULING TO U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT (the patent court)
December 19 2018 - 9:03AM
InvestorsHub NewsWire
DECN SUBSIDIARIES APPEAL NEVADA
DISTRICT COURT RULING TO U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FEDERAL
CIRCUIT (the patent court)
++
COMPANIES ANTICIPATE ANOTHER PRECEDENTIAL RULING FROM THE FEDERAL
CIRCUIT THREE JUDGE PANEL BASED ON ONE OVER-ARCHING ARGUMENT
++
LOS ANGELES, CA -- December 19, 2018
-- InvestorsHub NewsWire -- Decision Diagnostics Corp.
(OTC:PINK:
DECN) Decision Diagnostics Corp. is a 16 year old diabetes
focused bio-technology R&D firm, manufacturer, quality plan
administrator, FDA registered medical device customer support
organization, and exclusive worldwide sales and regulatory process
agent for a growing brand of glucose test strips and meters as
highly accurate alternatives for legacy diabetic, proprietary, and
pet testing glucose test strips. The company’s current portfolio of
test strips includes its GenUltimate!, GenChoice!, GenSure!, and
GenUltimate! TBG test strips, its Avantage! and Precise!
Glucometers, and its PetSure! and GenUltimate! 4Pets testing
products for dogs, cats and horses.
Decision Diagnostics through its
subsidiary corporations PharmaTech Solutions, Inc. and Decision IT
Corp. announces today that the companies have appealed the court
decision in its case against Johnson & Johnson (NYSE: JNJ) and
two Lifescan divisions, Nevada U.S. District Court case
2:2016cv00564, to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
in Washington, DC. The Federal Circuit Court hears all
appeals involving U.S. Patents.
In the companies’ case the trial judge
ruled incorrectly that the doctrine of prosecution history estoppel
preclude us from arguing that LifeScan’s OneTouch Ultra infringes
the patents-in-suit by the doctrine of equivalence. According
to the trial judge, during the prosecution of the patents, the
original patent applicants amended their claims and made arguments
to the examiner indicating that they were surrendering any way of
comparing measurements taken by an analyte monitoring system other
than the comparison of analyte measurements taken at different
times with each other. Specifically, the trial judge wrongly
concluded that to infringe, a device had to first convert a current
measurement to an analyte measurement before any comparison would
be made. The trial judge relied on erroneous claims made by Johnson
& Johnson in their pleadings and oral arguments.
Robert Jagunich, Chairman of the
companies comments, “The companies had several paths we could have
followed during the drafting of this appeal. We could have
listed all of the paragraphs in the trial judge’s ruling where he
erred, or we could have focused on the one over-arching issue that
we chose to argue, the one issue that the Circuit Court judge panel
will likely hone in on. Having been in front of this court twice
previously we have learned that once the three judge panel sustains
an appeal on one issue, all of the other claims are superfluous and
considered mute. Therefore, we took the straight path. We strongly
believe that our appeal will end with a positive conclusion, and
another Precedential (new law) ruling from the Federal Circuit
court.
The companies argue in their appeal
that the trial judge did not dig deep enough into the patent file
and thus erred because “the conversion element” had been disclosed
in the prior art (other similar patents granted along the
way). Instead, as the companies illustrate in their appeal,
this element was highlighted in the prosecution history of the
companies’ patents to show how currents measured at different times
could be meaningfully compared, and all of this discussion happened
twenty years ago, not in the trial judge’s courtroom in 2017 and
2018 as Johnson & Johnson misleadingly lead the trial judge to
believe.
Keith Berman. CEO of Decision
Diagnostics, the companies CEO commented, “Our application of the
patent laws is spot on. In this case we strongly believe that
we have a winner. And with a new Precedential ruling, there
is potential for DECN to be a big winner. Johnson & Johnson
sold infringing product, its popular OneTouch Ultra family of
products, from 2010 through the expiration of our patents in
February 2017. The courts have held that cases such as ours can
“look back” six years in infringement matters, and while J&J’s
OneTouch family is not as popular in the market as it once was,
there was not a year from 2010 through February 2017 (the
“look-back” years) where J&J’s Lifescan divisions did not earn
less than an estimated $1.2 billion in annual revenues, or an
estimated $300 million in annual profits.”
The company’s central argument is that
the trial judge cannot arbitrarily apply prosecution history
estoppel when the prior art already disclosed the claim language
added. This is a novel, even brilliant argument, and is not one
that has been made to the Federal Circuit previously. However, the
existing precedent suggests that the reasoning of our appeal brief
is more than solid.
Mr. Berman concluded, “Cases such as
ours, where the technology rights held our companies are directly
related to the method J&J took and used to determine glucose,
the single purpose of this offending product, often create
ill-gained profit damage awards that have been at the low end of 5%
and the high end of 20% of profit. And in some similar cases,
awards have resulted in a royalty penalty (revenue damage model) of
up to 10% of revenues in the 6-year look-back period.”
ABOUT DECISION DIAGNOSTICS
CORP
Decision Diagnostics Corp. is the leading
manufacturer and worldwide distributor of diabetic test strips
engineered to operate on legacy glucose meters. DECN's products are
designed to operate efficiently and less expensively on certain
glucose meters already in use by almost 7.5 million diabetics
worldwide. With new inspired technology diabetic test strips
already in the final stages of development, DECN products compete
on a worldwide scale with legacy manufacturers currently selling to
71+ percent of a $12 billion at-home testing
market.
Forward-Looking
Statements
This
release contains the company's forward-looking statements which are
based on management's current expectations and assumptions as of
December 18, 2018, regarding the company's business and
performance, its prospects, current factors, the economy, and other
future conditions and forecasts of future events, circumstances,
and results.
CONTACT
INFORMATION:
Decision Diagnostics Corp.
Keith Berman (805) 446-2973
info@decisiondiagnostics.com
www.genultimate.com
www.genchoice.com
www.petsureteststrips.com
www.pharmatechdirect.com
SOURCE: Decision
Diagnostics Corp.
Decision Diagnostics (CE) (USOTC:DECN)
Historical Stock Chart
From Oct 2024 to Nov 2024
Decision Diagnostics (CE) (USOTC:DECN)
Historical Stock Chart
From Nov 2023 to Nov 2024