Fresenius USA, Inc. v. Transonic Systems, Inc.

Good Law

207 F. Supp. 2d 1009·2001 WL 1669419·61 U.S.P.Q. 2d (BNA) 1058·2001 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 24065

United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaAugust 31, 2001C 01-02617 WHACalifornia1,445 words

Opinion

Alsup, J.

ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO DISMISS FOR LACK OF SUBJECT-MATTER JURISDICTION; VACATING HEARING

INTRODUCTION

In this patent-infringement case, this order GRANTS defendant’s motion to dismiss for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction. The hearing is VACATED.

STATEMENT

Plaintiff Fresenius USA, Inc. (“FUSA”) operates dialysis clinics. Defendant Transonic Systems, Inc. is the owner of the patent-in-suit, United States Patent No. 5,685,989. The ’989 patent is directed to a method and device used to measure access blood flow, which is the amount of blood flowing through an artificial vessel that is implanted in patients undergoing kidney dialysis.

On March 21, 2001, counsel for Transonic sent a letter to FUSA. It stated: “We represent Transonic Systems, Inc. (“Transonic”) of Ithica, New York, in matters regarding enforcement of the above-referenced patent” (Friedland Deck, Exh. A, at 1). The letter noted that Transonic had sued a different company, In-Line Diagnostics in Utah, and that the court in Utah had construed the claims of the ’989 patent broadly (ibid.). The letter stated: “It has recently come to our attention that Fre-senius is now taking active steps to market a…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.