Federal Circuit IP

Vascular Solutions v Medtronic

By Lawrence R. Furan Published October 16, 2024

Case No. 24-1398, Precedential, (Fed. Cir. Sep. 16, 2024)

Moore, Prost, Mazzant

Facts/Background:

  • Vascular Solutions sued Medtronic for patent infringement.
  • Patent claims a cardiac catheter device with a side opening and a substantially rigid portion/segment.
    • Some claims include the side opening as part of the substantially rigid portion/segment
    • Other claims recite the side opening as separate and distal to the substantially rigid portion/segment.
  • District court construed the claims in a mutually exclusive manner, and determined that if a device infringes both mutually exclusive claims, the claims are indefinite and therefore invalid.

Issue: did the district court err in claim construction?          

Holding: yes.

Analysis:

  • The term “substantially rigid portion” can be construed functionally:
    • The function is allowing the device to be advanced within the guide catheter.
  • Functional language is acceptable, and its interpretation can vary between independent claims.
  • The claims themselves indicate to a POSITA how to measure the metes & bounds of the invention on a claim-by-claim basis.
  • The position that a functional interpretation would allow the same device to infringe two claims that measure the boundary differently is premature at the claim construction stage.

Takeaways: the meaning of a claim term can vary while the construction remains consistent.