Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_06-cv-04455/USCOURTS-cand-3_06-cv-04455-15/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 830
Nature of Suit: Patent
Cause of Action: 35:271 Patent Infringement

---

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

MEDTRONIC, INC., ET AL,

Plaintiff,

 v.

W.L. GORE & ASSOCIATES, INC.,

Defendant. /

No. C 06-04455 JSW

NOTICE OF TENTATIVE CLAIM

CONSTRUCTION

TO ALL PARTIES AND THEIR ATTORNEYS OF RECORD, PLEASE TAKE

NOTICE OF THE FOLLOWING TENTATIVE RULING AND QUESTIONS FOR THE

HEARING SCHEDULED ON AUGUST 14, 2007, AT 2:00 p.m.:

The Court has reviewed the parties’ memoranda of points and authorities and, thus, does

not wish to hear the parties reargue matters addressed in those pleadings. If the parties intend to

rely on legal authorities not cited in their briefs, they are ORDERED to notify the Court and

opposing counsel of these authorities reasonably in advance of the hearing and to make copies

available at the hearing. If the parties submit such additional authorities, they are ORDERED

to submit the citations to the authorities only, without argument or additional briefing. Cf. N.D.

Civil Local Rule 7-3(d). The parties will be given the opportunity at oral argument to explain

their reliance on such authority.

The parties shall each have 90 minutes to present their respective arguments on claim

construction.

Case 3:06-cv-04455-JSW Document 78 Filed 08/13/07 Page 1 of 3
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

2

1. “Stress-induced martensite”

The Court tentatively adopts Medtronic’s construction of the term, but wishes to hear

from Medtronic why the additional language proffered in the Boston Scientific case was not

included here, i.e. “Martensite that forms due to the presence of stress, applied while the alloy is

above its Ms temperature, where Ms is determined at zero stress.” (See Wang Decl., Ex. B at

14.)

2. “Shape memory alloy element” and “memory alloy element”

The Court tentatively proposes the following construction, “a device or device

component made of an alloy that can be caused to revert, or to attempt to revert, from its

unstable deformed shape to its stable, original state.”

3. “Restraining means” “Restraining Member” and “Restraint”

The Court tentatively rejects that aspect of Gore’s proposed construction that would

include a requirement that martensite be formed by the application of stress alone and also

tentatively rejects Gore’s suggestion that the term include the reference to the temperature is

above the austenite start temperature. With respect to the ‘957 Patent, the Court tentatively

construes the term to mean “a device that prevents the transformation of the shape memory

alloy element back into its original state.” 

With respect to the ‘141 Patent, the Court tentatively construes the term to mean that

“a device component that surrounds the shape memory alloy element to prevent the

transformation of the shape memory alloy element back into its original shape.” 

4. “Wherein the memory alloy element can be extruded from the hollow

placement device by the guide wire”

The Court tentatively construes this term to mean “the device or memory alloy element

is forced out of the hollow placement device by the guide wire.” The Court’s tentative

construction is based upon the fact that the parties have not asked the Court to construe the term

“a guide wire,” from which the term “the guide wire” as used in the disputed phrase draws its

antecedent basis. 

Case 3:06-cv-04455-JSW Document 78 Filed 08/13/07 Page 2 of 3
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

3

5. “Catheter at least partly formed from a pseudoelastic shape memory alloy”

The Court tentatively construes this term to mean “a tube inserted into a cavity or duct

to withdraw or introduce devices that is made of, at least in part, a pseudoelastic shape-memory

alloy.” 

6. “Stent”

The Court tentatively construes this term to mean “a device used to maintain the

patency of a body vessel,” for all of the patents in which the term appears. 

7. “Zig zag means”

With respect to structure, the Court tentatively adopts Medtronic’s proposed

construction. With respect to function, the Court tentatively construes this term to mean that

“to expand the device radially without a substantial reduction in length.”

8. “Expand” and its variations.

The Court tentatively adopts Medtronic’s proposed construction.

9. Method Claims 9, 10, and 12 of the ‘062 Patent.

The Court tentatively concludes that the steps of these patents do not need to be

performed separately or in the order specified in the claims.

Dated: August 13, 2007 

JEFFREY S. WHITE

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:06-cv-04455-JSW Document 78 Filed 08/13/07 Page 3 of 3