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
UNION ELECTRIC COMPANY et al.vsMES, Inc.
Union Electric has filed an IPR petition challenging 29 claims of BirchTech’s mercury‑control patent, asserting lack of written description and anticipation/obviousness over multiple prior art references. The petition seeks institution and cancellation of the claims.
Google LLCvsPOINTWISE VENTURES, LLC
Google and Pointwise Ventures have settled their dispute over U.S. Patent 8,471,812 and jointly moved to terminate the pending IPR. The Board is asked to end the proceeding at this early stage.
Tessell, Inc.vsNutanix, Inc.
The PTAB notified the parties that a Director Review request has been filed in IPR2025-00298. The petitioner is limited to a five‑page response filed within five business days, and no new evidence may be introduced.
Motorola Solutions, Inc. et al.vsStellar, LLC
Stellar, LLC has filed a Request for Director Review challenging the PTAB’s institution of several IPRs against Motorola Solutions, alleging misapplication of the Fintiv discretionary factors. The petition seeks reversal of the institution decisions under 35 U.S.C. § 314(a).
Viant Technology LLC et al.vsAlmondNet, Inc.
Viant Technology and LiveIntent petition PTAB to invalidate AlmondNet's 2015 ad‑targeting patent, arguing obviousness over Burdick and a Burdick‑Grannan combination. The petition seeks institution of the IPR.
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.