Intellectual Property News and Reports

This case presents a question about the qualifications necessary to provide expert testimony from the perspective of one of ordinary skill in the art.

Planmeca USA Inc. (“Planmeca”) appeals the District of Delaware’s denial of its motion for judgment as a matter of law (JMOL) upholding the jury’s verdict that: (1) Planmeca infringes Osseo Imaging, LLC’s (“Osseo”) U.S. Patent Nos. 6,381,301, 6,944,262, and 8,498,374; and (2) certain claims of the ’301 patent, ’262 patent, and ’374 patent are not invalid for obviousness. The district court did not err in holding that Osseo’s expert testimony and other evidence provide substantial evidence supporting the jury’s verdict of infringement. Likewise, substantial evidence supports the jury’s verdict of nonobviousness of the challenged patent claims. We thus affirm.

Download OSSEO IMAGING LLC v. PLANMECA USA INC.