AGA Medical and the University of Minnesota have been locked in patent litigation since late November, 2007, over two patents relating to a medical device used in the repair of holes in hearts.
This week, U.S. District Court Judge Patrick J. Schiltz (D. Minn.) decided AGA Medical’s motion for summary judgment, granting it in part but holding that one aspect of the U’s claims “almost certainly” would have to be decided by a jury.
The opinion is a noteworthy example of Judge Schiltz’s clear, concise, and conversational writing style (notwithstanding the complexity of the subject matter) and his sometimes stinging directness (for example, at page 3: “the University’s arguments…show that the University either does not understand, or refuses to accecpt, the clear import of the Court’s earlier construction [of certain terms in the patents]…”)