Court Opinion

ID: 9440733
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-03 17:04:43.564919+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:27:53.493685
License: Public Domain

DYK, Circuit Judge,
concurring.
I join the majority opinion on the understanding that it does not foreclose the district court in its discretion from staying further proceedings pending the outcome of the reexamination before the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office. While Fresenius did not establish the invalidity of claims 26-31 of the '434 patent in the district court proceeding, those claims on their face are of dubious validity in light of our holding that claims 1-3 and 13-16 of the '131 patent and claim 11 of the '027 patent are invalid. It is entirely possible that the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office will finally conclude that claims 26-31 of the '434 patent are also invalid.