The following is excerpted from a Palomar press release posted on April 27, 2011 at Fierce Medical Devices:
Palomar Medical Technologies, Inc. (Nasdaq:PMTI), a leading researcher and developer of lasers and light systems for aesthetic treatments, announced today that its patent infringement lawsuit against Candela Corporation (acquired in 2010 by Syneron, Inc.) will now proceed to trial. Palomar has accused Candela of willful infringement of U.S. Patent No. 5,735,844 ("the '844 patent"). Today, the Judge issued a ruling on Candela's motion for summary judgment which marks a final step before trial.
The ruling denied Candela's motion for summary judgment that the '844 patent is invalid over prior art. The ruling further denied Candela's motion for summary judgment that Candela's products do not infringe claim 32 of the '844 patent. The Judge also ruled that Palomar had insufficient evidence to prove that Candela's products infringe claims 1, 19 and 27 of the '844 patent. Consequently, once the Judge conducts a scheduling hearing and a trial date is determined, the lawsuit will proceed to trial on Palomar's assertion that Candela's products infringe claim 32 of the '844 patent.
The '844 patent relates to light-based hair removal and has already been licensed to many other companies. The U.S. Patent Office has also found the existing claims, including claim 32 of the '844 patent, valid over prior art raised by Candela in a re-examination proceeding. Claim 32 of the '844 patent is broad and covers all of Palomar's licensee's hair removal products as well as Palomar's own hair removal products.
Palomar is also suing Syneron, Inc. for patent infringement of the '844 patent as well as related U.S. Patent No. 5,595,568 ("the '568 patent"). On November 17, 2010, a claim construction hearing (also known as a Markman hearing) was held and Syneron argued that certain words in the claims should be construed such that the claims would only cover lasers and would not cover their lamp based products. On April 14, 2011, the Judge issued a ruling which did not limit independent claims 1 of the '568 patent or 1, 17, 19, and 32 of the '844 patent to only lasers, such that these claims will cover both lasers and lamps. The ruling only limited independent claims 14 of the '568 patent and 27 of the '844 patent to lasers. Accordingly, Palomar's lawsuit will proceed against both Syneron's lamp and laser products.
Read the full press release here.