Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

CAVE CONSULTING GROUP, INC. v. TRUVEN HEALTH ANALYTICS INC., 15-cv-02177-SI. (2017)

Court: District Court, N.D. California Number: infdco20171024h88
Filed: Oct. 23, 2017
Latest Update: Oct. 23, 2017
Summary: ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT OF NON-INFRINGEMENT AND PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT OF NO INDIRECT INFRINGEMENT Re: Dkt. No. 253 SUSAN ILLSTON , District Judge . On October 6, 2017, the Court held a hearing on defendant's motion for summary judgment of non-infringement and partial summary judgment of no indirect infringement. Defendant contends that the accused products do not "allow[] assignment of an episode of care to more than one physician" nor do they "calculate[]
More

ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT OF NON-INFRINGEMENT AND PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT OF NO INDIRECT INFRINGEMENT

Re: Dkt. No. 253

On October 6, 2017, the Court held a hearing on defendant's motion for summary judgment of non-infringement and partial summary judgment of no indirect infringement.

Defendant contends that the accused products do not "allow[] assignment of an episode of care to more than one physician" nor do they "calculate[] weighted episode of care statistics across medical conditions utilizing a predefined set for a specific specialty type." Defendant also contends there is no evidence that any Truven customer has used Advantage Suite in an infringing manner.

"Summary judgment on the issue of infringement [or noninfringement] is proper when no reasonable jury could find that every limitation recited in a properly construed claim either is or is not found in the accused device either literally or under the doctrine of equivalents." PC Connector Solution LLC v. SmarDisk Corp., 406 F.3d 1359, 1364 (Fed. Cir. 2005). The Court finds that defendant has not met its burden to show that summary judgment is appropriate. There are disputes of fact as to whether the accused products perform both of the limitations at issue. Further, the Court declines defendant's request to rewrite the construction of "calculate[] weighted episode of care statistics across medical conditions utilizing a predefined set for a specific specialty type." Finally, plaintiff has submitted evidence that defendant provided training materials on how to use Advantage Suite to calculate physician efficiency (Dkt. No. 285-13), thus raising a triable issue of fact as to whether any customers used Advantage Suite in an infringing manner. See Toshiba Corp. v. Imation Corp., 681 F.3d 1358, 1364-65 ((Fed. Cir. 2012) (reversing summary judgment and holding there was a triable issue of fact on induced infringement where there was evidence that accused infringer designed product in an infringing way and instructed users to use the product in an infringing way).

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Source:  Leagle

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer