Khan v. Artivion, Inc., No. 23-2347 (Fed. Cir. July 16, 2024)

From the Opinion

The passage below is extracted verbatim from the opening of the document. It has not been editorially summarized — consult the full opinion for the court's complete reasoning.

Nazir Khan,1 owner of U.S. Patent No. 8,747,344 (“’344 patent”), filed a complaint against Artivion , Inc. 2 (“Artiv- ion”) in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia (the “Georgia Action”). Khan alleged that a product made by Artivion , the “HeRO Graft,” a de- vice used for hemodialysis, infringed claims of the ’344 pa- tent literally, under the doctrine of equivalents, and also under 35 U.S.C. § 112(f), governing means-plus-function claiming. On the same day, Khan filed suit against another company, Merit Medical, Inc.