IP Law Daily, PATENT—NDIll: Patent Infringement Claims Involving 3D Fabrication Machines Required Fact Finders to Weigh Expert Testimony, (Nov 8, 2012)

By Mark Engstrom, J.D.

The issue of whether two lines of stereolithography machines created by the defendants (3D Systems Corp. and 3D Systems Inc.) infringed on the patents of a company that developed high-performance UV-light materials (DSM Desotech, Inc.) presented questions of fact that required the testimony of competing expert opinions, the federal district court in Chicago has ruled (DSM Desotech, Inc. v. 3D Systems Corp., November 7, 2012, Coleman, S.). 3D’s motion for summary judgment of non-infringement was therefore denied.

The accused machines used computer-assisted designs to create three-dimensional objects on a layer-by-layer basis, using lasers and scanning systems. The machines incorporated a “recoating” system that allegedly infringed two DSM patents. Because the court found that there were questions of fact as to whether the accused machines contained a vertical component of motion that was capable of lifting resin above the surface of the part being fabricated, and those questions of fact required a jury to weigh expert testimony, the court denied 3D’s motion for summary judgment of DSM’s literal infringement claims.

The court also denied 3D’s motion for summary judgment based on the doctrine of equivalents. 3D unsuccessfully argued that summary judgment of noninfringement was warranted based on: (1) prosecution history estoppel; (2) the doctrine of claim vitiation; and (3) operation of the recoating system.

The case is No. 08 cv 1531.

Jeffrey Brandon Burgan (Leydig, Voit & Mayer, Ltd.) for DSM Desotech Inc. Michael Sennett (Jones Day) for 3D Systems Corp.

Cases: Patent IllinoisNews