Business
Decision Diagnostics Discusses Culmination of Patent Case Against J&J and Its Divisions Based on The Federal Doctrine of Equivalents
Decision Diagnostics Discusses Culmination of Patent Case Against J&J and Its Divisions Based on The Federal Doctrine of Equivalents.
About this update from Decision Diagnostics Corp
[{"type":"text","content":"DECN Believes that Health Industry Giant is Employing Very Risky Summary Judgment Strategy in $400 Million CaseLOS ANGELES, CA / ACCESSWIRE / March 27, 2018 / Decision Diagnostics Corp. (OTC PINK: DECN), is the manufacturer, quality plan administrator and the exclusive worldwide sales, service and regulatory processes agent for the GenUltimate! and GenSure! glucose test strips, both designed to work with the market leading Johnson & Johnson's (''J&J'') LifeScan OneTouch Ultra and Select family of glucose testing meters, and the GenChoice! and GenPrecis! glucose test strips and meters now in clinical trials and advanced pre-market testing.The company today reports two consequential updates in the nearly seven-year legal battle with two divisions of pharmaceutical industry giant Johnson + Johnson (''J&J''). In September 2011, J&J began a series of lawsuits based on allegations of patent and trademark infringement. Three of these lawsuits were settled in DECN's favor in May 2016.During settlement negotiations, which began in March 2016, DECN filed a separate lawsuit through its two IP management subsidiaries in the United States District Court, District of Nevada, in Las Vegas, NV, Case 2:16-cv-00564, titled Pharma Tech Solutions, Inc. et al v. Lifescan, Inc. et al naming Johnson & Johnson and its divisions Lifescan, Inc. and Lifescan Scotland Ltd. for alleged infringement in relation to U.S. Patent numbers 6,153,069, an apparatus patent, and 6,413,411, a method patent.Keith Berman, Principal Executive of Decision Diagnostics, stated, ''Our litigation record of consecutive litigation victories against arguably the most powerful healthcare company on the planet extends back over six years. That legal history forewarned the headwind we would face in undertaking this patent infringement lawsuit but also alerted us to the delay tactics and obfuscation that would be desperately employed to avoid the final judgment in our favor. J&J first filed the expected Motion to Dismiss the DECN suit devoid of evidence and based almost solely on testimony and pleadings in the first three cases. The trial judge justifiably ruled that their (J&J's) word would not be adequate; a significant departure from prior litigation.''Concurrent to the Motion to Dismiss rejection, the judge simultaneously ruled that PharmaTech would be...