University Involvement
As a result of his work, Dr. Spievack filed two patent applications in October 2000 which were issued in June, 2003 - the 265 and 538 patents. During the patent approval process, Purdue Research Foundation (PRF), under the auspices of 37 C.F.R. § 1.47(a), demanded that Dr. Badylak and four other Purdue researchers be added as co-inventors to Spievack's patents. Dr. Badylak filed papers under oath denying any inventorship in Spievack's patents. The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office denied Purdue's request to add additional inventors to Spievack's patents.
Legal Filings/Proceedings
Cook Biotech Incorporated and Purdue Research Foundation v. ACell, Incorporated, Stephen F. Badylak and Alan R. Spievack
Counter Claim by ACell Incorporated, Badylak & Spievack v. Cook Biotech and Purdue
- Plaintiff Assertions: Patent infringement
- Damages Sought: $1,815,700
- Filed: June 23, 2003
Awards/Legal Rulings
- Decision: A jury found that ACell and the other defendants were infringing upon the patent of Cook Biotech, but did not find that they were doing so willfully. The plaintiffs, though victorious in this initial suit, were awarded no damages.
- Appeal: A panel of three judges of the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals unanimously reversed the decision on the basis that the Federal District Court misinterpreted the scope of the patent held by Purdue that the defendants were accused of infringing.
|
