Home Diagnostics, Inc. v. LifeScan, Inc.

Good Law
120 F. Supp. 2d 864·2000 WL 1677211·58 U.S.P.Q. 2d (BNA) 1084·2000 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 16443
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaOctober 26, 2000C99-21269 JWCalifornia3,067 words

Opinion

Opinion

Ware, J.

ORDER GRANTING-IN-PART AND DENYING-IN-PART HDI’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT OF NON-INFRINGEMENT BASED ON COLLATERAL ES-TOPPEL

I. INTRODUCTION

This ease concerns the application of the collateral estoppel doctrine in a second patent infringement case between the same parties that litigated a prior patent infringement case. Counterclaim I in this suit involves the same patent but a different accused product than the first case. Counterclaim II involves a different patent and different accused product. The Court finds that there is no legitimate dispute that the accused product in this case contains the identical structure as was previously litigated. The Court therefore applies the doctrine of collateral estoppel and grants summary judgment as to Counterclaim I. Summary judgment is denied as to Counterclaim II.

II. BACKGROUND

This is an action for declaratory judgment. Plaintiff, Home Diagnostics, Inc. (“HDI”) filed this suit seeking judgment that the use of its new blood glucose monitoring systems, called the Prestige LX meter and the Prestige Smart Systems (collectively “the LX”) does not infringe either LifeScan’s U.S. Patent No. 5,049,487 (the “’487 patent”) or LifeScan’s…

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.