Celsis In Vitro, Inc. v. Cellzdirect, Inc.

664 F.3d 922 (2012)

Purchase the Printed Copy at bsmsphd.com

Nature of the Case

To access this section all you need to do is click here and register.

Facts

P is the assignee of the '929 patent which claims methods for preparing multi-cryopreserved hepatocytes (a type of liver cell). Human hepatocytes are a useful laboratory model for evaluating drug candidates. They have a short lifespan which causes an inconsistent and limited supply. The only sources of fresh hepatocytes are liver resections or non-transplantable livers of multi-organ donors. Hepatocytes become available at unpredictable times. Researchers need a pool of hepatocytes from a larger group of different liver donors to minimize the effect of outliers. The '929 patent uses a method for multi-cryopreserving hepatocyte cells and from the results, P sells multi-cryopreserved hepatocyte products. D also sells pooled multi-cryopreserved hepatocyte products, which P alleges involve performing a process infringing the '929 patent. P sued D for infringement and moved for a preliminary injunction. The district court found that P had shown a likelihood of success on the merits. It also considered D's defenses: non-infringement, obviousness, written description, and inequitable conduct. The court granted P a preliminary injunction. D appealed