Cordis Corp. v. Boston Scientific Corp. and SciMed Life Systems, Inc. (Fed. Cir. May 28, 2004) (Unpublished Opinion)
The appellate panel affirmed the lower court’s denial of Cordis’s motion for a preliminary injunction.
The most interesting aspect of the opinion involves the public interest component of the PI analysis. Historically, courts have found that the public interest “lies in upholding the the exclusive rights of a patentee.” See, Pfaff v. Wells, 525 U.S. 55. In this case, however, the Court held that the public interest swings the other direction:
for good reason, courts have refused to permanently enjoin activities that would injure the public health…. In this case, a strong public interest supports a broad choice of drug-eluting stents, even though no published study proves the superiority of either … stent.
Read more about the Cordis lawsuits here.