Short Summary
The PTAB found all 29 challenged claims unpatentable by a preponderance of evidence. The Board rejected the Patent Owner's argument that the invention was limited to RF neurotomy, adopting Petitioner's broader view of 'thermal ablation systems.'
Detailed Summary
In this final written decision, the PTAB determined that the 29 claimed methods for RF neurotomy using deployable filaments were obvious over prior art references (Racz, Fitz, Lee). The Board found motivation to combine Racz with the teachings of Fitz and Lee, which addressed energy coverage and filament control in thermal ablation systems. Crucially, the Board rejected the Patent Owner's attempt to narrow the scope of the invention solely to RF neurotomy, thereby broadening the field of inquiry and supporting the finding of obviousness under 35 U.S.C. § 103.
Practitioner Note
This case demonstrates the evidentiary and procedural standards applied in patent matters before local courts. Understanding the court's reasoning in Avanos Medical, Inc. vs Stratus Medical, LLC is valuable context for structuring arguments or assessing risk in similar proceedings.
Related Cases
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al.vsHEADWATER RESEARCH LLC
Samsung seeks director review of the PTAB’s denial to institute an IPR on Headwater’s patent 11,096,055. Headwater’s response argues the recission of the Vidal Memo was proper, that discretionary denial is statutorily authorized, and that no notice‑and‑comment rulemaking was required.
Nyxoah, Inc. et al.vsInspire Medical Systems, Inc.
Nyxoah has filed an IPR petition seeking to invalidate Inspire Medical Systems' patent on hypoglossal nerve stimulation for sleep apnea. The petition asserts obviousness over prior‑art neurostimulator references (Durand/Hoegh and Headley/Tran). The Board is asked to institute review and cancel the claims.
Bruker Spatial Biology, Inc.vs10x Genomics, Inc. et al.
Bruker Spatial Biology and 10x Genomics have settled their dispute over U.S. Patent 11,542,554, filing a joint motion to terminate the pending IPR. The Board has not issued a final decision, and the parties seek to keep the settlement confidential.
FRESH PRODUCTS, LLCvsSANASTAR INC.
The document is a January 14, 2021 notice of termination of agreement submitted as an exhibit in IPR2025-01366 between Fresh Products, LLC and Sanastar, Inc. The termination suggests the parties may have settled the dispute.
Cisco Systems, Inc.vsDynamic Mesh Networks, Inc.
The PTAB denied institution of an IPR because the patent owner had filed a statutory disclaimer covering all challenged claims and the entire patent term.
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.