Web Results


Nov 4, 2013 ... LIFESCAN SCOTLAND, LTD. v. SHASTA TECHNOLOGIES, LLC. 3 systems typically consist of an electrochemical meter and disposable test strips. To use the system, the user first inserts a test strip into the meter, then uses a lancet to draw a small drop of blood and places the drop on the test strip.


Nov 3, 2015 ... revenue streams, patent claims and licence grants early on, a seller or licensor can enhance its ability to avoid exhaustion and benefit from different revenue streams. Footnotes. 1. LifeScan Scotland, Ltd et al v Shasta Technologies, LLC, 734 F.3d 1361 (Fed. Cir. 2013). 2. Keurig, Inc v Sturm Foods, Inc, 732 ...


Sep 29, 2015 ... [2] LifeScan Scotland Ltd. v. Shasta Techs., LLC, 734 F.3d 1361 (Fed. Cir. 2013) ( deciding whether patentee's distribution of blood glucose measuring meters intended for use with complementary, perishable, unpatented test strips shields competing test-strip seller from liability for inducing and contributing ...


In LifeScan Scotland, Ltd. v. Shasta Technologies, No. 2013-1271 (Fed. Cir. Nov. 4, 2013),1 the Federal Circuit reversed an order granting a preliminary injunction blocking sales of consumable test strips for use in LifeScan's meters because its distribution of meters for free likely exhausted its patent rights. We reported on ...


Jan 5, 2018 ... The Federal Circuit case, LifeScan Scotland, Ltd. v. Shasta Technologies, LLC[15 ] provides a post-Quanta example of patent exhaustion involving a disposable component used in a larger device. LifeScan Scotland (“LifeScan”) sold a glucose metering system having a meter device and disposable test ...


Nov 14, 2013 ... In LifeScan Scotland, Ltd. V. Shasta Technologies, LLC, the Federal Circuit found that LifeScan's distribution of its One-Touch Ultra glucose meters exhausted its patent rights such that it could not prevent Shasta from selling disposable test strips for use in the meters. In so doing, the court reversed the ...


Oct 9, 2016 ... This would prevent Gillette from recouping its costs under this model, making it an economically unsound course of action. In LifeScan Scotland, Ltd. v. Shasta Technologies, LLC,5 the. Federal Circuit heard, in a matter of first impression, whether a patentee should retain rights to control the use of a good.


Apr 21, 2016 ... Imports at 912; see also LifeScan Scotland, Ltd. v. Shasta Techs., LLC, 734 F.3d 1361, 1376 (Fed. Cir. 2013). Absent a robust patent-exhaustion doctrine, patent- infringement claims “survive numerous transactions regarding the patented good, allowing the force of the patent to intrude deeply into the.


2. IP Litigator. JANUARY/FEBRUARY 2014 of noninfringing uses may have saved it from exhaustion. The second case, LifeScan Scotland. Ltd. v. Shasta Technologies, LLC,. [734 F.3d 1361 (Fed. Cir. 2013)] deals with two parties with a similar rela- tionship to those in Keurig but with a couple different twists. The plaintiff,.