Hill-Rom Services, Inc. Sues Stryker Corporation for Patent Infringement of Beds and Stretchers With Powered Wheels Technology

Indianapolis; IN – Patent lawyers for Hill-Rom Services, Inc. of Batesville, Indiana filed a patent infringement suit alleging Stryker Corporation of Kalamazoo, Michigan infringed twelve patents owned by Hill-Rom all of which have been issued by the US Patent Office.

Hill-Rom alleges that Stryker has manufactured, used , imported, offered for sale, or sold ten types of stretchers and hospital beds with powered wheels that infringe Hill-Rom’s patents. Hill-Rom is seeking damages and declaratory judgment for these patent infringement claims as provided by the Patent Act. In the complaint, patent attorneys also claim that two of Stryker’s patents interfere with patent claims in Hill-Rom’s patents, which were filed with the US Patent Office before Stryker filed its patents. Hill-Rom is seeking a declaratory judgment that Stryker’s infringing patents are invalid.

Hill-Rom’s patents at issue are Patent No. 6,993,799, HOSPITAL BED; Patent No. 7,644,458, HOSPITAL BED; Patent No. 6,588,523, STRETCHER HAVING A MOTORIZED WHEEL; Patent No. 6,902,019, STRETCHER HAVING A MOTORIZED WHEEL; Patent No. 7,011,172, PATIENT SUPPORT APPARATUS HAVING A MOTORIZED WHEEL; Patent No. 7,284,626, PATENT SUPPORT APPARATUS WITH POWERED WHEEL; Patent No. 7,090,041, MOTORIZED TRACTION DEVICE FOR A PATIENT SUPPORT; Patent No. 7,273,115, CONTROL APPARATUS FOR A PATIENT SUPPORT; Patent No. 7,407,024, MOTORIZED TRACTION DEVICE FOR A PATIENT SUPPORT; Patent No. 7,828,092, MOTORIZED TRACTION DEVICE FOR A PATIENT SUPPORT; Patent No. 6,772,850, POWER ASSISTED WHEELED CARRIAGE; and Patent No. 6,752,224, WHEELED CARRIAGE HAVING A POWERED AUXILIARY WHEEL, AUXILIARY WHEEL OVERTRAVEL, AND AN AUXILIARY WHEEL DRIVE AND CONTROL SYSTEM.

This case has been assigned to Judge Jane E. Magnus-Stinson and Magistrate Judge Debra McVicker Lynch in the Southern District of Indiana, and assigned case no. 1:11-cv-00458-JMS-DML.

Practice Tip: In this case, two of the patent infringement claims allege that patents filed by Stryker had claims that were identical to claims in patents already filed by Hill-Rom. The first to file a claim of invention has priority over later filed patents claiming the same invention. See 35. U.S.C. § 102(g). When a situation like this occurs, a plaintiff can seek a declaratory judgment that the later filed patent is invalid.

Complaint – Hill-Rom v Stryker

Defendants: STRYKER CORPORATION and STRYKER SALES CORPORATION

Presiding Judge: Jane Magnus-Stinson

Referring Judge: Debra McVicker Lynch

Cause Of Action: Patent Infringement

Court: Seventh Circuit > Indiana > Southern District Court

Type: Intellectual Property > Patent

Contact Information