Case 8:20-cv-00847-DOC-JDE Document 119 Filed 05/19/21 Page 1 of 4 Page ID #:2128
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`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
`
`
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
`SOUTHERN DIVISION
`
`COLIBRI HEART VALVE LLC,
`Plaintiff,
`
`vs.
`
`
`
`MEDTRONIC COREVALVE LLC,
`
`Defendant.
`
`
`
`Case No.: SA CV 20-00847-DOC-(JDEx)
`
`
`
`
`
`ORDER ADOPTING
`TECHNICAL SPECIAL MASTER
`REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
`ON CLAIM CONSTRUCTION
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`-1-
`
`Colibri Heart Valve LLC, Exhibit 2026, Page 1 of 4
`
`

`

`Case 8:20-cv-00847-DOC-JDE Document 119 Filed 05/19/21 Page 2 of 4 Page ID #:2129
`
`
`
`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
`
`
`
`Plaintiff Colibri Heart Valve LLC (“Plaintiff” or “Colibri”) asserts United States Patents No.
`8,900,294 (“the ’294 Patent”) and 9,125,739 (“the ’739 Patent”) (collectively, “the patents-in-suit”)
`against Defendant Medtronic CoreValve LLC (“Defendant” or “Medtronic”). Plaintiff has asserted
`Claims 1–4 of the ’294 Patent and Claims 1–3 and 5 of the ’739 Patent. (Dkt. 84 at 2–3.) “The accused
`products are Medtronic’s transcatheter aortic valve replacement products: CoreValve, CoreValve
`Evolut R, CoreValve Evolut PRO, and CoreValve Evolut PRO+.” (Id. at 9.) Before the Court are
`competing proposals for the proper constructions of disputed terms in the patents-in-suit. On
`November 24, 2020, the Court appointed David Keyzer to serve as the Technical Special Master for the
`Court in this case (Dkt. 75).
`The parties submitted their respective Opening Claim Construction Briefs on December 18,
`2020 (Dkts. 83, 84). The parties submitted their respective Responsive Claim Construction Briefs on
`January 11, 2021 (Dkts. 85, 86). Also before the Technical Special Master were the parties’
`December 9, 2020 Joint Claim Construction Chart (Dkt. 79, Ex. A), Plaintiff’s Opening Supplemental
`Claim Construction Brief (Dkt. 91), Defendant’s Supplemental Responsive Markman Brief (Dkt. 93),
`and Plaintiff’s Supplemental Claim Construction Reply Brief (Dkt. 95).
`Pursuant to the Court’s November 24, 2020 Order Appointing Technical Special Master
`(Dkt. 75), the Technical Special Master entered orders regarding the proceedings and conducted a claim
`construction hearing on February 1, 2021. The Technical Special Master entered a Technical Special
`Master Report and Recommendation on Claim Construction (referred to herein as the “R&R”) on
`February 11, 2021. (Dkt. 97-1.)
`The time for filing objections has passed (see Fed. R. Civ. P. 53(f)(2)), and no party has
`objected to the R&R.
`After conducting a de novo review, and considering that no party has objected to the R&R, the
`Court ADOPTS the Report and Recommendation of the Technical Special Master as outlined below.
`
`I. LEGAL STANDARD
`The Court reviews the Technical Special Master’s Report and Recommendation de novo,
`including as to legal conclusions and findings of fact. Fed. R. Civ. P. 53(f)(3), (4); Seaman v.
`
`-2-
`
`Colibri Heart Valve LLC, Exhibit 2026, Page 2 of 4
`
`

`

`Case 8:20-cv-00847-DOC-JDE Document 119 Filed 05/19/21 Page 3 of 4 Page ID #:2130
`
`
`
`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
`
`
`
`Sedgwick, Detert, Moran & Arnold, LLP, No. SACV-11-00664-DOC (RNBx), 2014 WL 12700973,
`at *1 (C.D. Cal. Sept. 30, 2014). Accordingly, “[t]he court may ‘accept, reject, or modify, in whole or
`in part, the findings or recommendations made by the [special master].’ The [court] may also receive
`further evidence or recommit the matter to the [special master] with instructions.” McDonnell Douglas
`Corp. v. Commodore Bus. Machs., Inc., 656 F.2d 1309, 1313 (9th Cir. 1981) (quoting 28 U.S.C.
`§ 636(b)(1)(C)).
`
`II. THE DISPUTED TERMS
`The Court adopts the following constructions as recommended by the Technical Special Master
`for all of the reasons described in the R&R and as being without any objection by the parties:
`
`
`Term
`
`A.(1) “valve”
`
`A.(2) “valve means”
`
`B.(1) “residing entirely within an inner channel
`of the stent member”
`
`B.(2) “resides entirely within the inner channel
`of the stent member”
`
`C. “flares at both ends in a trumpet-like
`configuration”
`
`Adopted Construction
`“portions of the replacement heart valve
`device that allow the one-way flow of blood”
`(See R&R at 5–15.)
`
`“residing such that all portions of the valve are
`entirely within the inner channel of the stent
`member” (See R&R at 16–37.)
`
`“having, at each end, a widening that
`resembles the bell of a conventional musical
`trumpet” (See R&R at 37–46.)
`
`
`-3-
`
`Colibri Heart Valve LLC, Exhibit 2026, Page 3 of 4
`
`

`

`Case 8:20-cv-00847-DOC-JDE Document 119 Filed 05/19/21 Page 4 of 4 Page ID #:2131
`
`
`
`D. “pushing out the pusher member from the
`moveable sheath”
`
`
`
`
`
`“pressing against the pusher member with a
`force that moves the pusher member outward
`from the moveable sheath”
`(See R&R at 46–58.)
`
`
`
`III. DISPOSITION
`For the aforementioned reasons, the Court hereby ADOPTS the Technical Special Master
`Report and Recommendation on Claim Construction (Dkt. 97-1).
`
`
`DATED: May 19, 2021
`
`
`
`
`
`HON. DAVID O. CARTER
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
`
`-4-
`
`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
`
`
`
`Colibri Heart Valve LLC, Exhibit 2026, Page 4 of 4
`
`