Short Summary
Imperative Care’s petition to invalidate Inari Medical’s hemostasis valve patent was granted. The Board found a reasonable likelihood of success on anticipation and obviousness grounds and instituted review of all nine claims.
Detailed Summary
In an inter partes review decision dated January 23, 2025, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board granted Imperative Care’s petition to institute review of Inari Medical’s U.S. Patent No. 11,697,011 covering hemostasis valves for minimally invasive surgery. The petitioner asserted five grounds of unpatentability, invoking 35 U.S.C. §§ 102 and 103, relying on prior art references Schaffer, Hartley, and Eller. The Board concluded that the petitioner demonstrated a reasonable likelihood of prevailing, particularly on anticipation of claim 1 by Schaffer, and therefore instituted the trial on all nine challenged claims. No claim constructions were finalized, and the matter proceeds to trial.
Practitioner Note
This case demonstrates the evidentiary and procedural standards applied in patent matters before local courts. Understanding the court's reasoning in Imperative Care, Inc. vs Inari Medical, Inc. et al. is valuable context for structuring arguments or assessing risk in similar proceedings.
Related Cases
Loco Crazy Good Cookers, Inc.vsNorth Atlantic Imports, LLC
The IPR concerning U.S. Patent 10,660,473 was terminated after the petitioner and patent owner reached a settlement and jointly moved to dismiss the proceeding.
Activision Blizzard, Inc.vsMilestone Entertainment, LLC
Milestone Entertainment’s preliminary response argues that Activision Blizzard’s IPR petition fails because the cited prior art does not disclose the required game‑processor features and one reference is not prior art. The Board is urged to deny institution.
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al.vsNetlist, Inc.
The PTAB issued a Final Written Decision in IPR2025‑01431, finding all 30 claims of Netlist’s ’918 hybrid memory module patent unpatentable after Samsung demonstrated obviousness over Harris, FBDIMM standards, Amidi and Hajeck.
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al.vsHannibal IP LLC
Samsung and Hannibal IP jointly filed a motion to terminate IPR2025-01187, citing a settlement agreement and requesting the agreement be kept confidential under statutory authority.
Disney Entertainment & Sports LLCvsAdeia Guides Inc.
Disney Entertainment & Sports LLC has filed an IPR petition seeking cancellation of all six claims of Adeia Guides’ U.S. Patent 10,165,324. The petition alleges obviousness over multiple prior‑art combinations and argues that those references were never considered during prosecution.
Dealing with a patent challenge?
Whether it's a Section 3(d) rejection, a post-grant opposition, or a FRAND dispute, Arctic's patent litigation team has handled it. Get a strategy call.
Disclaimer: This page contains an automated summary based on publicly available judicial records. The content is generated for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Always verify details against the original source judgment before relying on this information for any legal purpose. If you believe any information is inaccurate, please contact us.