In a recent development in the ongoing patent litigation between Maquet Cardiovascular LLC and Abiomed Inc., a Massachusetts federal judge has permitted Abiomed to assert the ensnarement defense, a relatively uncommon strategy in patent infringement cases. This decision comes despite the judge acknowledging the “difficult position” it places the court in, given prior criticism from the Federal Circuit regarding the timing of such defenses.
The ensnarement doctrine prevents a patentee from claiming a scope of equivalency that would encompass, or “ensnare,” the prior art. In this case, Abiomed introduced the ensnarement defense after the close of fact discovery, prompting Maquet to move to strike this late assertion. However, the court determined that the Local Rules do not specify the timing for disclosure of such a defense, and therefore would not preclude Abiomed from raising it at this point in the litigation. As Abiomed first raised the defense prior to the presentation of expert reports, and as “ample time” remained before trial, the judge declined to deem the defense waived and refused to strike portions of Abiomed’s expert report concerning ensnarement. ([lalaw.com](https://www.lalaw.com/d-mass-ip-litigation/article/maquet-cardiovascular-llc-v-abiomed-inc-et-al-d-mass-17-cv-12311/?utm_source=openai))
This ruling is part of a broader legal battle over patents related to intravascular blood pumps. Maquet, a subsidiary of Swedish medical device company Getinge AB, alleges that Abiomed’s Impella devices infringe on its patents. Abiomed, now a subsidiary of Johnson & Johnson MedTech, has contested these claims, leading to a series of legal maneuvers and counterclaims. ([law360.com](https://www.law360.com/ip/articles/2463135/abiomed-can-t-escape-blood-pump-patent-case?utm_source=openai))
Earlier this year, the Federal Circuit reversed a lower court’s ruling that Abiomed had not infringed five patents on blood pump systems and methods, while upholding the decision that cleared Abiomed of allegations it infringed a different patent. This appellate decision has added complexity to the ongoing litigation, influencing subsequent proceedings in the district court. ([law360.com](https://www.law360.com/massachusetts/articles/2439616/fed-circ-sends-blood-pump-patent-fight-back-to-mass-?utm_source=openai))
The judge’s recent decision to allow the ensnarement defense underscores the intricate nature of patent litigation, particularly in the medical device sector. Legal professionals and industry stakeholders will be closely monitoring the progression of this case, as its outcomes may have significant implications for patent enforcement and defense strategies in the healthcare industry.