CAFC upholds permanent injunction in Acumed v. Stryker

The CAFC wrote:

Ultimately, this was a close case, especially with regard to the
irreparable harm and lack of adequate remedy at law prongs of the four-factor test, in
view of past licenses having been granted, and the public interest prong, in light of
testimony that the accused product was a medically superior one. Nonetheless, the
standard of review, viz., abuse of discretion, compels our decision to affirm the district court.

The bottom line:

For the foregoing reasons, we affirm the decision of the district court to enter a
permanent injunction directed to the T2 PHN.

Niro, Scavone, Haller & Niro represented the losing party, Stryker.