ScriptPro LLC v. Innovation Associates, Inc.
96 F. Supp. 3d 1201
D. Kan.2015Background
- This is a patent infringement case involving ScriptPro LLC’s collating unit for automatic dispensing systems (ADSs).
- Innovation Associates, Inc. makes ROBOTx and is alleged to infringe claims 1, 2, 4, and 8 of the '601 patent.
- The case has a lengthy history, including a Federal Circuit reversal of a prior written-description ruling and remand for proceedings.
- Inter Partes Reexamination 95/000,292 led to claim reformation: claim 4 unchanged; claims 1 and 2 substantively amended.
- The central dispute is whether the claims’ broad language is sufficiently supported by the specification’s description of storage by patient name and slot availability.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Written-description sufficiency under 112 | ScriptPro asserts claims broadly cover automatic storage | Innovation contends claims are broader than the specification | Yes; claims lack written description support |
Key Cases Cited
- Gentry Gallery, Inc. v. Berkline Corp., 134 F.3d 1474 (Fed. Cir. 1998) (claims may be limited by the disclosed purpose; breadth must align with disclosure)
- ICU Med., Inc. v. Alaris Med. Sys., Inc., 558 F.3d 1368 (Fed. Cir. 2009) (spike limitation not present in broad claims likened to absent features in disclosure)
- Ariad Sys., Inc. v. Eli Lilly & Co., 598 F.3d 1336 (Fed. Cir. 2010) (written-description requires enablement of the claimed invention by skilled artisans)