A suit was filed on Friday in the Eastern District of Texas by plaintiffs Innovamed Health LLC (and Precision Holdings USA Inc. against Manamed Inc. The action for patent infringement alleges that Manamed infringed on Innovamed’s patented compression system through the production and marketing of their deep vein thrombosis compression products.
The complaint explained that since 2018, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office has issued two patents to plaintiff Innovamed. Both patents are titled “Portable Intermittent Pneumatic Compression System.” The complaint explains that Innovamed’s founders “recognized the need for a portable compression device that could help alleviate deep vein thrombosis,” at which point they developed the technology protected by the aforementioned patents.
The ‘475 patent held by Innovamed protects a technology that acts as a compression system, wrapping around a patient’s extremity and compressing in an effort to avoid deep vein thrombosis. The compression system is battery operated, entirely avoiding tubes that could create a tripping hazard for a patient. Further, the system has a divider, inflatable bladder, and a pressure sensor. The other patent-in-suit, the ‘704 patent, is similar to the technology described in the ‘475 patent. The difference is the arrangement of the compression system.
In early 2014, Innovamed licensed its patented portable compression device technology to global medical device company DJO. DJO then marketed and sold the technology in the form of the VenaPro product, described in the complaint as a “portable compression device for post-operative deep vein thrombosis.”
The defendant became incorporated in California in 2015, a year after the plaintiff’s license of its technologies to DJO. Three previous sales representatives for the VenaPro product, Trevor Theriot, John Lasso, and Joseph Horton, were principals, officers, and/or directors for the defendant. In 2016, the defendant began producing and marketing its competing product called the PlasmaFlow.
The plaintiffs alleged that the defendant’s portable deep vein thrombosis compression products infringe on the patents-in-suit since they employ the plaintiff’s patented portable deep vein thrombosis compression technology.
The complaint alleges that the infringement of the patents-in-suit on the part of the defendant is willful and that the defendant “knew or should have known that its actions constituted an unjustifiably high risk of infringement.”
The complaint cites two separate counts of infringement. The plaintiffs are seeking a trial by jury, favorable judgment on each count of willful infringement, a permanent injunction preventing the production and marketing of the accused products, damages sufficient to compensate for the infringement, and any other relief deemed equitable by the Court.
The plaintiff is represented by Potter Minton and Paul Hastings LLP.
