I got this from Vision Monday on my Facebook page this AM. Any thoughts??
http://www.visionmonday.com/ViewCont...3/Default.aspx
I got this from Vision Monday on my Facebook page this AM. Any thoughts??
http://www.visionmonday.com/ViewCont...3/Default.aspx
I'm curious what their case is for the patents being invalid. The first patent # I couldn't find, the second deals with splitting the add power front and back, the third covers modifying the channel length based on the Rx and Pt preference. I'm no expert on patents but, they seem normal to me.
What could invalidate them is trying to retro-patent them. If someone else was doing this prior to E filing the patent, it potentially is invalid.
Ahh, according the Patent office website they were filed in'99 and '00 and assigned to Johnson & Johnson. So I assume Essilor bought them.
Probably. Most invalidated patents occur because of "prior art", as its called. That's why a lot of times when you look at a patent, you see references to other similar patents. But if someone didn't patent a process, but then comes forward when a patent is issued or during a challenge, that patent can be invalidated.
It shows the importance of having the best patent attorney money can buy.
E bought Definity from J&J. Definity is the lens that was patented for dual add technology.
Essilor International (Compagnie Generale d'Optique) SA et al v. Indizen Optical Technologies S.L. et al
Filed: February 22, 2013as 4:2013cv00099Updated: March 1, 2013 06:40:35
Plaintiffs: Essilor International (Compagnie Generale d'Optique) SA and Essilor of America Inc
Defendants: Indizen Optical Technologies S.L., Indizen Optical Technologies of America, LLC, Younger Manufacturing Co., Vision Service Plan, VSP Labs, Inc. and others
Cause Of Action: Patent Infringement
Court:Fifth Circuit > Texas > Eastern District Court
Type:Intellectual Property > Patent
Younger Manufacturing Co et al v. Essilor International Compagnie Generale D Optique et alFiled: February 20, 2013as 2:2013cv01210Updated: February 21, 2013 22:11:47
Plaintiffs: Indizen Optical Technologies S L, Indizen Optical Technologies of America LLC, VSP Labs Inc, VSP Optical Group Inc, Vision Service Plan and others
Defendants: Essilor International Compagnie Generale D Optique and Essilor of America Inc
Court:Ninth Circuit > California > Central District Court
Type:Intellectual Property > Patent
http://dockets.justia.com/search?q=E...America%2C+Inc.
Well, let me be the first to say WAY TO GO YOUNGER!!
If you have integrity, nothing else matters. If you don't have integrity, nothing else matters
Laramy-K Optical
It's hard to believe J&J, a company known for innovation and a ton of patents, to blow a patent on the Definity lens. It may be a bit premature to congrats Younger. As far as VSP.... It wouldn't hurt my feelings one bit if they loose the suit.
And I would say WAY TO GO to anyone else who makes a stand...premature or otherwise.
If you have integrity, nothing else matters. If you don't have integrity, nothing else matters
Laramy-K Optical
In the end no matter who wins this means higher costs to my office as the direct consumer of ff lenses. Of course crap rolls down hill so the end result is higher prices for my clients who will ultimately look elsewhere for lower prices.
This legal matter affects exactly one lens design in a categoy that contains hundreds of designs. To suggest that this matter will cause patients to leave your practice is a stretch.
RT
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Bookmarks