Court Rules in Favor of Neogen in Vicam Case
TAMPA, Fla., June 25 /PRNewswire/ -- A federal court in Florida has ruled in favor of Neogen Corporation (Nasdaq: NEOG - news) in a patent dispute with Vicam, L.P. concerning a diagnostic test of particular interest to the peanut industry. The ruling is seen as a pivotal decision in the ongoing lawsuit between the two companies.
''We regard this court ruling to be a key decision that should lead to a fairly quick resolution of this dispute,'' said James Herbert, Neogen's president. ''Though Vicam still has some options remaining if it wishes to delay the inevitable result, Neogen believes that this ruling is paramount in vindicating Neogen of the charges made by Vicam. The ruling should help remove the threat that has been hanging over the heads of our customers and potential customers regarding the purchase of our product.''
''Neogen realizes that the prediction of the final outcome of litigation can never be absolutely certain,'' Herbert continued. ''However, we regard this court ruling as a major victory in bringing to a close expensive litigation that has continued for the past three years.''
In August 1997 Vicam and its president, Jack Radlo, sent a letter to more than 100 companies alleging that one of Neogen's diagnostic tests
infringed on two patents licensed to Vicam. The letter threatened those companies with legal action if they purchased Neogen's new product to detect aflatoxin in peanuts. Aflatoxin is a known carcinogen of particular concern to the peanut industry.
Neogen provided Vicam with evidence that the patent infringement allegations were baseless, and asked for an immediate retraction. After Vicam refused, Neogen brought suit for damages and asked the court for a declaratory judgement that Neogen's product did not infringe on Vicam's patents. About a year after Neogen filed suit, Vicam filed a counterclaim alleging patent infringement, but only on one of the two patents.
Although Vicam's patent specified the use of only a certain ''monoclonal antibody,'' Vicam attempted to argue that the term ''monoclonal antibody'' included ''polyclonal antibodies'' -- the type utilized by Neogen's test. Prior to manufacturing its immunoaffinity column diagnostic test, Neogen had obtained the written opinions of two highly-respected patent law firms. The law firms independently concluded that Neogen's invention would not infringe Vicam's narrow patents, as polyclonal antibodies are produced utilizing a completely different technology than that for a monoclonal antibody.
The U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida ordered an evidentiary hearing to determine the meaning and scope of the patent
terms at issue. For all practical purposes, the only term at issue was ''monoclonal antibody'' as used in Vicam's patent. Following an
evidentiary hearing, the Court issued a lengthy opinion finding that the ''evidence therefore supports Neogen's definition of the term'' at issue, ''monoclonal antibody.'' In its Opinion, the Court held that ''Vicam's current definition is a post hoc rationalization designed to expand the patent's coverage beyond what was intended,'' and that Vicam's ''explanation makes no sense.''
The Court further held that ''the prosecution history thus clearly supports Neogen's view that the term 'monoclonal antibody,' as used in the patent, refers to an antibody derived from the hybridoma technology.'' Thus, the Court held that '''monoclonal antibody' -- the principal term under construction -- means an antibody produced by hybridoma technology.'' Significantly, Neogen's product does not utilize hybridoma technology, which means that there can be no infringement of Vicam's patent.
Prior to the Court's decision construing the term ''monoclonal antibody,'' Vicam assured the Court that once this decision was issued, ''the handwriting would be on the wall at that point as to what the likely outcome, liability wise, would be,'' and ''certainly who was going to win and who was going to lose would be pretty well decided.'' Neogen has agreed that the only genuine issue remaining is the amount of damages it has suffered as a result of Vicam's wrongful actions and defamatory statements.
Neogen is a worldwide leader in the development and marketing of diagnostic test kits for the detection of harmful residues in food and
animal feed products. The company sells other diagnostic test kits for the detection of aflatoxin under the brand names Veratox® and
Agri-Screen®. It was only Neogen's aflatoxin column format that Vicam has claimed infringed on its patents. Neogen markets over 150
diagnostic tests worldwide for the detection of natural toxins, foodborne bacteria, drug residues, pesticides and food allergens.
This press release contains forward-looking statements that involve a number of risks and uncertainties.
SOURCE: Neogen Corporation |
