Ariosa Diagnostics, Inc. v. Sequenom, Inc.

Good Law
19 F. Supp. 3d 938·2013 WL 5863022·2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 156554
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaOctober 30, 2013No. C 11-06391 SICalifornia8,348 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Illston, J.

ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND DENYING DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

Cross-motions for summary judgment by plaintiff/counterdefendant Ariosa Diagnostics, Inc. and defendant/counterclaim-ant Sequenom, Inc. came on for oral argument on October 11, 2013. Having considered the parties’ motion papers, pleadings and arguments, and for good cause shown, the Court GRANTS Ariosa’s motion for summary judgment and DENIES Sequenom’s motion for summary judgment.

BACKGROUND

In this declaratory judgment action, plaintiff Ariosa, formerly known as Aria Diagnostics, Inc., seeks a declaration that its non-invasive prenatal test, the Harmony test, using cell-free fetal DNA circulating in the blood of a pregnant woman does *941 not directly infringe or contribute to the infringement of U.S. Patent No. 6,258,540 (“the ’540 patent”), licensed by defendant Sequenom.

1. The ’540 Patent

Sequenom is the exclusive licensee of the ’540 patent, which Sequenom licensed from Isis Innovation Limited (“Isis”). See Docket No. 37, Tatman Decl. ¶¶ 3^1 The ’540 patent is entitled “Non-invasive Prenatal Diagnosis,” and was issued to inventors Yuk-Ming Dennis Lo and James…

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.