Preliminary injunction denied where plaintiff failed to establish likelihood of success on the merits and irreparable harm
Digene Corporation v. Ventana Medical Systems, et al., No. 01-752-MPT, May 9, 2007.
Thygne, J. Court denied preliminary injunction against defendant asserting a license defense notwithstanding decision by an arbitration panel that the assignment between co-defendants of rights violated terms of a cross licensing agreement.
After plaintiff brought a patent infringement case against Ventana, the Court directed the plaintiff to arbitrate all claims against one of the defendants arising from a cross licensing agreement. Sublicensee’s rights were later transferred to defendant Beckman through an Asset Purchase Agreement. The arbitration panel determined that the assignment between defendants violated the terms of the cross licensing agreement. The Court denied the preliminary injunction, holding that the arbitration panel’s decision had no preclusive effect under the doctrine of collateral estoppel where plaintiff had objected to Digene’s request to intervene in the arbitration. The Court ruled that plaintiff failed to establish a likelihood of success on the merits where Ventana argued that the assignment of rights was valid because the arbitration decision did not invalidate the Asset Purchase Agreement. Finally, plaintiff failed to establish irreparable harm where its request for injunctive relief was not timely and damages were not inadequate.
A copy of the full opinion is available here.
