Shockwave Medical, Inc. v. Cardiovascular Systems, Inc., No. 2023-1864, 2023-1940 (July 14, 2025) (precedential) (3-0); Patent No. 8,956,371

Key point:

• Applicant admitted prior art cannot form the basis of a petition for IPR, but can be used as evidence of background knowledge of a POSITA.

Top Brand LLC v. Cozy Comfort LLC, No. 2024-2191 (July 17, 2025) (precedential) (3-0); Patent No. D859,788

Key point:

• Prosecution history disclaimer can operate to limit claim scope of a design patent by amendment and by argument.

Colibri Heart Valve LLC v. Medtronic CoreValve, LLC, No. 2023-2153 (July 18, 2025) (precedential) (3-0); Patent No. 8,900,294

Key point(s):

• Prosecution history estoppel can exist based on cancelling a closely related claim involving such intertwined terminology when cancelling that one claim necessarily communicates that the scope of the other claims is narrowed.
• Prosecution estoppel arises when an amendment is made to narrow the patent’s scope as a whole.