Proveris Scientific today issued the following statement:
“We are surprised and saddened that Innova has persisted in selling their infringing system”
Judge William G. Young, United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts, has ruled that InnovaSystems, Inc. (“Innova”) is in contempt of court for violating the court’s permanent injunction entered in May 2007.
The court rejected all of Innova’s arguments that its supposedly new equipment, currently known as the Aerosol Drug Spray Analyzer (ADSA), is materially different from the already enjoined Optical Spray Analyzer (OSA) equipment.
The court concluded that Innova’s spray pattern and plume geometry equipment infringes Proveris Scientific Corporation’s United States patent 6,785,400.
The finding of contempt is noteworthy. Contempt rulings for violations of permanent injunctions entered in patent infringement cases are rare. Courts are cautious about finding a party in contempt because, when contempt is found, the enjoined party is subject to sanctions to vindicate the affront to the court’s authority.
This contempt finding also means that Innova customers who purchased the ADSA equipment purchased patent infringing equipment that Innova was prohibited by the court from making, using, exporting, or selling.
“We are surprised and saddened that Innova has persisted in selling their infringing system,” said Dino Farina, Founder and CEO of Proveris. “Our intellectual property portfolio is strong and we will continue to protect it.”
Proveris plans to request the court to enter a sanction comprised of monetary and injunctive relief, including the court’s enforcement of the provisions of the injunction prohibiting Innova from providing any maintenance or service on any products sold in contempt of its injunction.
History of the Litigation:
After finding that Innova’s OSA infringes 9 of the 13 claims in Proveris’s 6,785,400 patent, in May 2007 the court entered a permanent injunction that prohibits Innova, its officers, employees, directors, agents, lawyers, and all persons acting in concert with them from:
•Making the OSA
•Using [i.e. feasibility testing, validation testing] the OSA
•Selling the OSA
•Offering for sale [ i.e. quotations] the OSA
•Exporting the OSA out of, or importing the OSA into, the U.S.
By its contempt order, the court found that Innova violated the permanent injunction by engaging in one or more of the proscribed activities in connection with the spray pattern and plume geometry equipment it has made, marketed, used, sold, and exported since entry of the permanent injunction.
SOURCE Proveris Scientific