Latest Cambodian News
— Plaintiff Entitled to Book Royalties
DALLAS, Feb. 20, 2015 /PRNewswire/ — In a verdict with blockbuster implications, a jury in the case of Pedroza vs. Hayward and TWCS Operations Proprietar…
DUSSELDORF, Germany, Jan. 14, 2015 /PRNewswire/ — On December 16, 2014, B. Braun Melsungen AG obtained a positive judgment in a law-suit against Becton Dickinson GmbH before the Regional Court Dusseldorf (docket no. 4b O 57/13). According to this judgment, Becton Dickinson may not distribute any longer the product “Venflon Pro Safety” in the sizes 14G to 22G (“Venflon Pro Safety”) as it infringes the European Patent EP 2 319 556 B1 (patent in suit) for safety IVC catheters of B. Braun. The patent in suit describes a safety mechanism for peripheral intravenous catheters.
With the enforcement B. Braun has inter alia prohibited Becton Dickinson the marketing of “Venflon Pro Safety” in Germany and has requested Becton Dickinson to recall already marketed IVCs of the type “Venflon Pro Safety”.
Becton Dickinson is free to file an appeal against the judgment of the Regional Court Dusseldorf. An opposition for nullification of the patent in suit as filed by Becton Dickinson with the European Patent Office had already been rejected in first instance in November 2014 against which Becton Dickinson already filed an appeal.
For more information on B. Braun visit http://www.bbraun.com
Contact::
Mechthild Claes
press@bbraun.com
Tel. +49(0-56-61)71-1635
Fax +49(0-56-61)75-1635
BEIJING, Dec. 24, 2014 /PRNewswire/ — The International Trade Commission (ITC) issued its final decision in the case brought by ResMed (RMD) against BMC Medical. In a notice issued on December 23, the ITC ruled in favor of BMC and found that ResMed’s patent on its humidifier was invalid.
Logo – http://photos.prnasia.com/prnh/20140423/0861402591
BMC’s President, James Xu called the decision a “monumental win”. “We are very excited with the ITC’s decision in this case. This victory for us supports the position that we have taken since the very beginning on the key patents in the case. ResMed chose a very expensive high-profile battle, when this dispute could have easily been resolved with direct discussions between the parties.”
The ITC’s decision is the latest in a lengthy 18 month battle that has spanned across the globe and spawned litigation not only in the U.S., but also in Germany and China. In this October, the Munich court has removed the preliminary injunction based on EP1210139B1 patent served to BMC concerning the CPAP devices, and ResMed should compensate BMC’s damages including the legal fees. In China, BMC has initiated seven nullity actions for ResMed’s patents, and four of them are totally invalid and the other three are being reviewed by the SIPO.
The ITC decision also sides in ResMed’s favor on some of the mask patents, but the disputed masks account for far less than 10 percent of BMC’s U.S. sales. And BMC stops the disputed masks earlier this year, and the redesigned masks have already been released onto the U.S. market.
About BMC
BMC is one of the global leaders in the development, manufacturing and marketing of medical products for the treatment and management of sleep disordered breathing.
For more information about BMC, please visit http://en.bmc-medical.com/.
CULVER CITY, Calif., Dec. 18, 2014 /PRNewswire/ — As is being widely reported in the press, Sony Pictures Entertainment (SPE) experienced a significant system disruption on Monday, November 24, 2014. SPE has determined that the caus…
Hospital Imitating Nationally-renowned UFH Brand Fined by Local Authorities, Marking Important Progress Against Trademark Infringers in China’s Healthcare Sector, Protecting Patients
BEIJING, Dec. 9, 2014 /PRNewswire/ — United Family Healthcare (UFH), China’s first and largest foreign-invested healthcare provider, announced preliminary progress in the fight against trademark infringement of its China-wide nationally known healthcare brand. Guizhou, China provincial authorities today released an official decision paper that censures and imposes fines on a hospital in Weining County that is illicitly using the UFH brand to attract patients. In October of this year, UFH submitted an official complaint to the local and provincial Administration for Industry and Commerce (AIC) in Weining, Guizhou regarding the gross infringement of the UFH registered brand trademark for a hospital operating under the name “Weining United Family Hospital.” The complaint stated that the Weining hospital is misleading patients into believing that UFH is managing its facility when, in fact, United Family Healthcare has no affiliation with this organization whatsoever. The infringing hospital is using the UFH logo on its building signage as well as on all its marketing materials, doctor and nurse uniforms, websites, and social media channels. It even uses actual pictures of UFH leadership along with UFH Chair Roberta Lipson and former US Commerce Secretary Gary Locke opening real UFH facilities, but employing imaging software to add the word “Weining” before “United Family Hospital,” making it look to be UFH and United States government supported. US President Obama is also pictured as endorsing the hospital.
As a result of the official complaint, the local and provincial authorities in Guizhou have investigated the situation and have provided a ruling against the trademark infringer, directing the facility to cease use of the United Family Healthcare logo, but not yet requiring them to stop usage of the United Family trade name. A financial fine of RMB 81,300 (approximately US$ 13,263) has also been imposed on the hospital. The Guizhou AIC has required the Weining hospital to immediately take these corrective actions, noting this penalty decision is a first step, and that there might be further action taken requiring a name change, and more. United Family Healthcare will continue to pursue additional action in this regard, as it deems it totally unacceptable for any other hospital to use the name United Family Healthcare or its Chinese name “He Mu Jia.”
United Family Healthcare Chairperson, Roberta Lipson, noted, “We at UFH are deeply appreciative of the Guizhou government’s efforts in investigating the matter, in making a strong public declaration in our favor, and in taking some steps to correct the situation. For 17 years UFH has been building a brand which represents the highest quality healthcare standard. This quality has been affirmed by multiple international quality agencies including the Joint Commission International (JCI), the College of American Pathologists (CAP) and others. Consumers seeking the very best in medical care have come to trust the meaning of the UFH brand. When the brand is falsely copied, patients can be misled into believing that they can expect the same standard of care as in a real UFH facility, but in fact they may be receiving substandard care which can be dangerous. This is not different than the manufacture and sale of fake medications. We hope that newcomers to China’s medical industry will now think carefully before seeking to copy top brands like United Family Healthcare. We also look forward to a further ruling from the Chinese government to stop all copycat usage of the United Family Healthcare trade name.”
Such further action would provide a clear message to all those in China’s healthcare industry that the Chinese government will seek to rigorously enforce intellectual property laws and sternly punish those infringing on registered brands like UFH. Infringement not only negatively impacts the business environment for private healthcare in China, but it can also mislead or harm patients seeking appropriate care. UFH is interested in letting others know about this situation, since the company’s first and foremost concern is always for the health and personal safety of every individual in its greater community, and their right to access safe, effective, and government-approved healthcare. It will always be UFH’s concern when individuals receive non-standard treatment in a non-accredited medical environment, possibly threatening patient safety. In this situation, patients were specifically led to believe that United Family Healthcare was managing the Weining facility. As a result, UFH has received several complaints from individual patients about the substandard care they received in Weining, but UFH is unfortunately unable to address these individuals’ complaints as it is not associated with that facility in any way.
For the health and safety of everyone, UFH hopes that trademark infringement of healthcare providers in China ceases immediately. UFH is committed to working with all relevant Chinese authorities to make the enforcement of trademark laws a priority. Healthcare is an important social good and highly regulated by the government, as it should be. Consumers depend on the government to ensure the highest quality and safety in healthcare. Tricks, brand stealing, and fakes should never be allowed. United Family Healthcare thanks the Guizhou provincial and local governments for their efforts so far in protecting the unique United Family Healthcare brand, and thanks the Chinese government at many levels for their enforcement efforts in this matter. We sincerely hope they will continue to protect Chinese citizens from harm by those copying well-established brands such as UFH.
About United Family Healthcare
United Family Healthcare (UFH) is a leading premium Asian healthcare service provider based in Beijing. UFH’s mission is to provide comprehensive, integrated healthcare in a uniquely warm, caring, patient service-oriented environment. UFH owns or operates 5 hospitals and 14 clinics, and constantly strives for quality, safety, and service excellence. In China, all facilities in its system with long-term operation are accredited with the gold standard for quality by Joint Commission International (JCI). More information is available at http://www.ufh.com.cn.
Photo – http://photos.prnasia.com/prnh/20141208/0861409301-a
Photo – http://photos.prnasia.com/prnh/20141208/0861409301-b
 |
BEIJING, Dec. 2, 2014 /PRNewswire/ — BMC Medical Co., Ltd. (“BMC”) announced today a first success in a first round of a global battle with ResMed.
“A high possibility, that the patent in suit is not valid,” the District Court of Munich I stated in a decision (official docket number 7 O 24459/13), referring to the German counterpart of ResMed’s European Patent No. 1 210 139 B1 relating to a CPAP system with detachable water tank. The Court removed the preliminary injunction based on that German counterpart, and stayed a parallel infringement proceeding until an opinion on validity in an ongoing invalidity proceeding before the German Patent Court. BMC reserves the right to possible damage claims.
Furthermore, another European patent asserted by ResMed against BMC, EP 0 661 071 relating to Auto On/Off function, has expired.
“We will continue to proceed with the ongoing legal proceedings, especially the invalidity actions against ResMed’s patent, while monitoring competitors’ patent portfolio. Our proactive approach has proved to be successful,” said Mr. Xu, president of BMC Medical.
Meanwhile, in the U.S., the International Trade Commission (ITC) recently decided to review earlier determinations against BMC made in a 337 investigation by an Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) below. The ITC apparently believed the ALJ improperly defined the scope of ResMed’s patent protection and modified the ALJ’s interpretation of key claim terms, effectively forcing ResMed to withdraw one patent, U.S. Patent No. 7,926,487. The validity of another patent, U.S. Reissue Patent No. RE 44,453 (“‘453 patent”) is reviewed, as well. In addition, the ITC raises the question of whether ResMed satisfies the domestic industry requirement, i.e., whether ResMed even had the right to a 337 investigation to begin with.
The ‘453 patent is the only patent ResMed asserted against BMC’s CPAP breathing machines. BMC has already brought the validity problems to the attention of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office and asked for an inter partes review (IPR) of the ‘453 patent. The IPR is ongoing.
In China, BMC challenged validity of seven (7) ResMed patents, and the SIPO has already declared four (4) invalid, while continuing to review the other three (3).
For more information about BMC, please visit http://en.bmc-medical.com/.
WILMINGTON, Del., Oct. 27, 2014 /PRNewswire/ — The following statement is being issued regarding the In re Specialty Products Holding Corp. matter (Case No. 10-11780 (PJW) (Bankr. D. Del. 2010).
A Joint Plan of Reorganization (“Plan”) has been filed to reorganize Specialty Products Holding Corp. (formerly known as RPM, Inc.), Bondex International, Inc., Republic Powdered Metals, Inc., and NMBFiL, Inc. (formerly known as Bondo Corporation) (collectively, “Debtors”) in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware (“Bankruptcy Court”).
Persons or entities with asbestos related personal injury claims against any of the Debtors may vote to accept or reject the Plan by December 2, 2014.
A detailed document describing the Plan, called the Disclosure Statement, was approved by the Bankruptcy Court on October 20, 2014. The Disclosure Statement, a copy of the Plan itself and voting materials have been sent to known holders of asbestos related personal injury claims against the Debtors or to their lawyers.
Important Plan Provisions Regarding Asbestos Related Claims
The Plan proposes establishing a trust to resolve all asbestos personal injury claims against the Debtors. Persons and entities with asbestos personal injury or related claims will be forever barred from asserting their claims against the Debtors or other parties specified in the Plan. If the Plan is approved by the Court, all current and future holders of asbestos personal injury claims against the Debtors can request and receive money only from the trust. You should read the Plan and Disclosure Statement carefully for details about how the Plan, if approved, will affect your rights.
Voting Procedures
The Bankruptcy Court has issued an order describing how to vote on the Plan and the Disclosure Statement contains information that will help you decide how to vote. Your legal rights will be affected if the Plan is approved. For a vote to be counted, a ballot must be received at the address indicated on the ballot form by 5:00 p.m., Eastern time, on December 2, 2014.
Under the procedures approved by the Bankruptcy Court, lawyers for holders of asbestos claims may vote on the Plan on behalf of their clients, if authorized by the client. If you are unsure whether your lawyer is authorized to vote on your behalf, please contact your lawyer.
How to Obtain Documents
Copies of the Disclosure Statement, which includes the Plan, the voting materials, and the notice of the hearing to consider confirmation of the Plan may be obtained by visiting the following websites: http://www.deb.uscourts.gov and http://www.loganandco.com. You may also obtain copies of these documents by sending a request, in writing, to Logan & Company, Inc., 546 Valley Road, Upper Montclair, NJ 07043 (Attn: SPHC Voting Department) or by calling 1-866-692-2119.
Confirmation Hearing
A hearing to consider confirmation of the Plan has been scheduled for December 10, 2014 at 3:30 pm ET in Courtroom 4B at the United States District Court for the District of Delaware, J. Caleb Boggs Federal Building, located at 844 North King Street, 4th Floor, Wilmington, Delaware 19801. You may attend the Hearing but are not required to do so.
Objecting to the Plan
If you want to object to the Plan, you must file and serve a written objection on or before 5:00 p.m. ET, on December 2, 2014. All objections must comply with the requirements in the notice of the Confirmation Hearing.
For more information and to obtain a copy of the Plan, Disclosure Statement and Voting Materials,
Visit: http://www.deb.uscourts.gov OR http://www.loganandco.com.
Write: Logan & Company, Inc., 546 Valley Road,
Upper Montclair, NJ 07043
(Attn: SPHC Voting Department)
Call: 1-866-692-2119
SAN DIEGO and TAIPEI, Sept. 5, 2014 /PRNewswire/ — ResMed Inc. and APEX Medical Corp. have agreed to a confidential settlement resolving their outstanding patent disputes. Under the agreement, APEX has the right to sell and import globally …
Judge Finds Nine BMC Products Infringe ResMed Patents
Judge Recommends Excluding U.S. Sale of BMC Masks and BMC Humidifier
SYDNEY and SAN DIEGO, Aug. 25, 2014 /PRNewswire/ — An administrative law judge at the International Trade Commission (ITC) ruled Friday August 22 in a patent infringement case brought by ResMed (NYSE: RMD) against Chinese medical device manufacturer BMC Medical Co., Ltd., that each of nine BMC products named in the action infringes one or more ResMed patents. As a result, ITC Judge Thomas Pender recommended that the ITC ban BMC and its U.S. distributor, 3B Medical, from importing or selling any of the infringing BMC products in the United States. Judge Pender also recommended a cease and desist order that would enjoin BMC and 3B from selling, advertising, marketing, storing or testing the infringing products in the United States. ResMed is the innovation leader and pioneer in designing and manufacturing devices for the treatment of sleep-disordered breathing.
Judge Pender found that BMC’s InH2 humidifier, as well as original and redesigned versions of the following BMC masks infringe ResMed’s patents:
“The Judge’s decision is not just a victory for ResMed and the product innovation that is core to our brand, but it’s also a win for patients who deserve high quality, comfortable care,” said David Pendarvis, ResMed chief administrative officer and global general counsel. “We will continue innovating and continue protecting our intellectual property anywhere we identify infringement.”
About ResMed:
ResMed changes lives by developing, manufacturing and distributing medical equipment for treating, diagnosing, and managing sleep-disordered breathing, COPD, and other chronic diseases. We develop innovative products and solutions to improve the health and quality of life of those who suffer from these conditions, and we work to raise awareness of the potentially serious health consequences of untreated sleep-disordered breathing. For more information on ResMed, visit www.resmed.com.
|
Contacts: |
|
|
For News Media |
For Investors |
|
Gretchen Griswold |
Agnes Lee |
|
Director, Global Corporate Communications |
Senior Director, Investor Relations |
|
O: +1-858-836-6789 |
O: +1-858-836-5971 |
Logo – http://photos.prnewswire.com/prnh/20140310/LA79234LOGO-a
NEW YORK, Aug. 21, 2014 /PRNewswire/ — The District Attorney’s Office for Queens County, New York, dismissed all criminal charges today in its $50 million Internet sports betting and enterprise corruption case against prominent Southe…