DCT

1:19-cv-01126

Becton Dickinson Co v. NeuMoDx Molecular Inc

Log In
Key Events
Amended Complaint

I. Executive Summary and Procedural Information

  • Parties & Counsel:
  • Case Identification: 1:19-cv-01126, D. Del., 02/25/2021
  • Venue Allegations: Venue is alleged in the District of Delaware based on Defendant NeuMoDx being a Delaware corporation and Defendant QIAGEN entities allegedly conducting business in the district through agents or subsidiaries.
  • Core Dispute: Plaintiffs allege that Defendants’ automated molecular diagnostics systems, and related consumables, infringe thirteen patents related to microfluidic devices, sample processing, and nucleic acid analysis.
  • Technical Context: The technology at issue involves automated microfluidic systems for molecular diagnostics, which integrate sample preparation, nucleic acid extraction, and real-time polymerase chain reaction (PCR) to rapidly detect infectious diseases and other conditions.
  • Key Procedural History: The complaint alleges a deep history between the parties, noting that key founders of Defendant NeuMoDx were formerly executives at Plaintiff HandyLab and are named inventors on many of the asserted patents. Plaintiffs also allege that Defendants had pre-suit knowledge of the patents, citing Defendants' patent prosecution files and petitions for inter partes review (IPR) filed against at least two of the asserted patents in December 2018.

Case Timeline

Date Event
1999-01-01 HandyLab, Inc. founded
2001-07-26 Earliest Priority Date for ’308 and ’069 Patents
2004-05-03 Earliest Priority Date for ’663, ’456, ’088, and ’788 Patents
2006-03-24 Earliest Priority Date for ’708 and ’900 Patents
2007-07-13 Earliest Priority Date for ’261, ’262, and ’466 Patents
2009-01-01 Becton, Dickinson and Company acquires HandyLab, Inc.
2011-08-16 U.S. Patent No. 7,998,708 Issues
2012-01-01 NeuMoDx Molecular, Inc. founded
2012-09-25 U.S. Patent No. 8,273,308 Issues
2012-12-04 U.S. Patent No. 8,323,900 Issues
2013-04-09 U.S. Patent No. 8,415,103 Issues
2014-04-22 U.S. Patent No. 8,703,069 Issues
2014-04-29 U.S. Patent No. 8,709,787 Issues
2018-09-17 QIAGEN and NeuMoDx announce strategic partnership
2018-12-01 QIAGEN files IPR petitions against the ’708 and ’900 patents
2019-07-30 U.S. Patent No. 10,364,456 Issues
2019-10-15 U.S. Patent No. 10,443,088 Issues
2019-12-03 U.S. Patent No. 10,494,663 Issues
2020-03-31 U.S. Patent No. 10,604,788 Issues
2020-04-21 U.S. Patent Nos. 10,625,261 and 10,625,262 Issue
2020-04-28 U.S. Patent No. 10,632,466 Issues
2020-09-17 QIAGEN acquires remaining 80.1% stake in NeuMoDx
2021-02-25 Complaint Filing Date

II. Technology and Patent(s)-in-Suit Analysis

U.S. Patent No. 8,273,308 - "Moving Microdroplets in a Microfluidic Device"

Issued September 25, 2012

The Invention Explained

  • Problem Addressed: The patent addresses the challenge of precisely managing and processing minute fluid samples within a microfluidic device, particularly for performing chemical reactions like PCR amplification which require thermal cycling in a contained environment (’308 Patent, col. 1:25-30).
  • The Patented Solution: The invention is a microfluidic system that features a "DNA manipulation module" with a specific reaction zone. This zone is located downstream of a main channel and is bracketed by a first (upstream) and second (downstream) valve (’308 Patent, col. 2:50-60). A controller is programmed to close both valves, which isolates a liquid sample within the zone, preventing gas or liquid from flowing in or out during processes like PCR amplification (’308 Patent, col. 3:1-7; Fig. 4). This design creates a discrete, thermally-controlled micro-reactor on the chip.
  • Technical Importance: This approach provides a method for creating individually-addressable, sealed reaction chambers within a continuous-flow microfluidic system, enabling parallel processing of multiple distinct samples without cross-contamination (’308 Patent, col. 1:31-40).

Key Claims at a Glance

  • The complaint asserts independent claims 1, 18, and 19 (Compl. ¶68).
  • Essential elements of independent claim 1 include:
    • A system with a microfluidic device, a computer-controlled heat source, and a detector.
    • The microfluidic device comprising an upstream channel and a downstream DNA manipulation module.
    • Within the module, a DNA manipulation zone configured for PCR amplification.
    • A first valve upstream and a second valve downstream of the DNA manipulation zone.
    • A vent separated from the upstream channel by the first and second valves.
    • A controller programmed to close the valves to prevent gas and liquid flow during amplification.
    • The only ingress to and egress from the zone is through the first and second valves.
    • The heat source is in thermal contact with the zone, and the detector is configured to identify polynucleotides within the zone.

U.S. Patent No. 8,703,069 - "Moving Microdroplets in a Microfluidic Device"

Issued April 22, 2014

The Invention Explained

  • Problem Addressed: This patent, related to the ’308 patent, addresses the method of performing nucleic acid amplification, rather than the system itself. The technical problem is the sequence of steps required to reliably isolate and process a sample in a microfluidic device (’069 Patent, col. 1:25-30).
  • The Patented Solution: The patented solution is a method comprising the steps of: moving a sample from an upstream channel into a DNA manipulation module; receiving the sample in a DNA manipulation zone that is flanked by two valves; closing both valves to prevent gas and liquid from flowing into or out of the zone; and then thermally cycling the sample within that isolated zone (’069 Patent, col. 33:34-45). This method recites the operational sequence for using the system described in the ’308 patent.
  • Technical Importance: This method provides a defined workflow for creating discrete, on-demand reaction chambers within a microfluidic device, which is a foundational process for automated, high-throughput molecular diagnostics (’069 Patent, col. 1:31-40).

Key Claims at a Glance

  • The complaint asserts independent claim 1 (Compl. ¶79).
  • Essential elements of independent claim 1 include:
    • A method of amplifying a nucleic acid-containing sample in a microfluidic device.
    • Moving the sample from an upstream channel into a DNA manipulation module.
    • The module includes a DNA manipulation zone for amplification, a first valve upstream, and a second valve downstream, with the only ingress and egress being through these valves.
    • Receiving the sample in the DNA manipulation zone.
    • Closing the first and second valves to prevent gas and liquid from flowing into or out of the zone.
    • Thermal cycling the sample in the DNA manipulation zone.

U.S. Patent No. 7,998,708 - "Microfluidic System for Amplifying and Detecting Polynucleotides in Parallel"

Issued August 16, 2011

  • Technology Synopsis: The patent describes an apparatus for parallel PCR analysis. It comprises a multi-lane microfluidic cartridge, a receiving bay for the cartridge, and separately controllable heat sources thermally coupled to each PCR reaction zone, allowing for independent thermal cycling of multiple samples simultaneously (Compl. ¶89).
  • Asserted Claims: Independent claims 1 and 33 (Compl. ¶88).
  • Accused Features: The NeuMoDx 288 and 96 Molecular Systems (Compl. ¶45, ¶89-90).

U.S. Patent No. 8,323,900 - "Microfluidic System for Amplifying and Detecting Polynucleotides in Parallel"

Issued December 4, 2012

  • Technology Synopsis: Related to the ’708 Patent, this patent describes an apparatus with a plurality of multi-lane microfluidic cartridges and a corresponding plurality of receiving bays. This architecture allows for concurrent or consecutive processing of multiple cartridges, each containing multiple samples, with each PCR zone having a separately controllable heat source (Compl. ¶99, ¶100).
  • Asserted Claims: Independent claims 1, 7, and 20 (Compl. ¶98).
  • Accused Features: The NeuMoDx 288 and 96 Molecular Systems (Compl. ¶45, ¶99-101).

U.S. Patent No. 10,494,663 - "Method for Processing Polynucleotide-Containing Samples"

Issued December 3, 2019

  • Technology Synopsis: This patent claims a multi-step method for isolating polynucleotides from a biological sample. The method involves lysing a sample, contacting the resulting lysate with magnetic binding particles, transferring the particles through a microfluidic network for washing, and then eluting the polynucleotides by heating in a release solution to form a PCR-ready solution (Compl. ¶129).
  • Asserted Claims: Independent claim 1 (Compl. ¶128).
  • Accused Features: The NeuMoDx 288 and 96 Molecular Systems (Compl. ¶45, ¶129).

U.S. Patent No. 10,364,456 - "Method for Processing Polynucleotide-Containing Samples"

Issued July 30, 2019

  • Technology Synopsis: This patent describes a method for processing a sample by retaining polynucleotides on binding particles under a first set of conditions (pH ≤ 8.5, temp ≈ 50° C) and releasing them under a second set of conditions (higher pH via hydroxide solution, temp between 80-100° C). The method is specified for processing small sample volumes within a process chamber (Compl. ¶138).
  • Asserted Claims: Independent claim 1 (Compl. ¶137).
  • Accused Features: The NeuMoDx 288 and 96 Molecular Systems (Compl. ¶45, ¶138).

U.S. Patent No. 10,443,088 - "Method for Processing Polynucleotide-Containing Samples"

Issued October 15, 2019

  • Technology Synopsis: This patent is related to the ’456 Patent and claims a similar method of retaining and releasing polynucleotides from binding particles. It specifies a first temperature between 30° C and 50° C for binding and a second temperature between 80° C and 100° C for release, which is triggered by the addition of a hydroxide solution (Compl. ¶147).
  • Asserted Claims: Independent claim 1 (Compl. ¶146).
  • Accused Features: The NeuMoDx 288 and 96 Molecular Systems (Compl. ¶45, ¶147).

U.S. Patent No. 10,604,788 - "System for Processing Polynucleotide-Containing Samples"

Issued March 31, 2020

  • Technology Synopsis: This patent describes a system for polynucleotide processing that includes a microfluidic device, an external lysing container with magnetic binding particles, and multiple external heat sources. An operating system actuates the heaters to control the temperature for lysis, binding, and release of polynucleotides within different processing regions of the system (Compl. ¶156).
  • Asserted Claims: Independent claim 1 (Compl. ¶155).
  • Accused Features: The NeuMoDx 288 and 96 Molecular Systems (Compl. ¶45, ¶156).

U.S. Patent No. 10,625,261 - "Integrated Apparatus for Performing Nucleic Acid Extraction and Diagnostic Testing on Multiple Biological Samples"

Issued April 21, 2020

  • Technology Synopsis: This patent covers an integrated system with two modules for extraction and amplification. The system uses a bay to receive a housing with multiple process chambers, and includes a magnetic separator and a heating assembly positioned on opposite sides of the housing to perform nucleic acid extraction (Compl. ¶165). A liquid dispenser moves between locations to dispense samples and reagents.
  • Asserted Claims: Independent claim 1 (Compl. ¶164).
  • Accused Features: The NeuMoDx 288 and 96 Molecular Systems (Compl. ¶45, ¶165).

U.S. Patent No. 10,625,262 - "Integrated Apparatus for Performing Nucleic Acid Extraction and Diagnostic Testing on Multiple Biological Samples"

Issued April 21, 2020

  • Technology Synopsis: This patent describes a system with a first module for nucleic acid extraction and a second for receiving the extracted nucleic acids. The first module comprises sample tubes, corresponding process chambers, a waste chamber, a magnetic separator, and a heater assembly, all configured to process a plurality of samples (Compl. ¶174). A liquid dispenser is configured to move liquid between the sample tubes and receptacles in the second module.
  • Asserted Claims: Independent claim 1 (Compl. ¶173).
  • Accused Features: The NeuMoDx 288 and 96 Molecular Systems (Compl. ¶45, ¶174).

U.S. Patent No. 10,632,466 - "Integrated Apparatus for Performing Nucleic Acid Extraction and Diagnostic Testing on Multiple Biological Samples"

Issued April 28, 2020

  • Technology Synopsis: This patent claims a method of analyzing multiple samples by extracting nucleic acids in a first module and simultaneously amplifying them in a second module. The extraction method involves receiving a housing with process chambers and using a liquid dispenser, magnetic separator, and heating assembly to process the samples within those chambers (Compl. ¶183).
  • Asserted Claims: Independent claim 1 (Compl. ¶182).
  • Accused Features: The NeuMoDx 288 and 96 Molecular Systems (Compl. ¶45, ¶183).

(Note: Patents '103 and '787 were also asserted but the complaint does not provide the claim language in the body of the counts for those patents, instead incorporating claim charts by reference. As the exhibits are not provided, a multi-patent capsule cannot be constructed for these patents.)

III. The Accused Instrumentality

Product Identification

  • The Accused Products are identified as the NeuMoDx™ 288 Molecular System and the NeuMoDx™ 96 Molecular System, along with associated instruments, consumables, test strips, and reagents (Compl. ¶45).

Functionality and Market Context

  • The complaint alleges that the Accused Products are fully-automated molecular diagnostic platforms that perform clinical sample preparation, nucleic acid extraction, microfluidic real-time PCR amplification, and detection in a single system (Compl. ¶13, ¶15). Plaintiffs allege that these systems utilize the same patented technologies that Plaintiffs acquired from HandyLab and developed into their own BD MAX™ System, and that Defendants market the Accused Products as competing with the BD MAX™ System (Compl. ¶15, ¶46). The complaint provides a screenshot of a webpage from NeuMoDx's website that lists patents associated with its products by category, such as "CARTRIDGE" and "XPCR MODULE" (Compl. ¶50, p.18).

IV. Analysis of Infringement Allegations

’308 Patent Infringement Allegations

Claim Element (from Independent Claim 1) Alleged Infringing Functionality Complaint Citation Patent Citation
A system, comprising: a microfluidic device; a computer-controlled heat source; and a detector; The complaint alleges the Accused Products are such a system but does not specify the precise corresponding components. ¶69 col. 2:50-52
wherein the microfluidic device comprises: an upstream channel; a DNA manipulation module located downstream from the upstream channel; The complaint alleges the Accused Products contain this configuration but does not map the specific components. ¶69 col. 2:53-56
a DNA manipulation zone within the DNA manipulation module and configured to perform PCR amplification of a sample; The complaint alleges the Accused Products contain a DNA manipulation zone for PCR but does not identify its specific location or features. ¶69 col. 2:57-59
a first valve disposed within the DNA manipulation module upstream of the DNA manipulation zone; The complaint alleges the Accused Products contain this upstream valve but does not provide technical details of its structure or operation. ¶69 col. 2:60-62
a second valve disposed within the DNA manipulation module downstream of the DNA manipulation zone; and The complaint alleges the Accused Products contain this downstream valve but does not provide technical details of its structure or operation. ¶69 col. 2:63-65
a vent disposed within the DNA manipulation module and separated from the upstream channel by the first and second valves; The complaint alleges the Accused Products contain this vent configuration but does not specify its structure or location. ¶69 col. 2:66-67
a controller programmed to close the first and second valves to prevent gas and liquid from flowing into or out of the DNA manipulation zone when amplification of the sample occurs... The complaint alleges the Accused Products are controlled in this manner but does not provide details on the controller's programming. ¶69 col. 3:1-5
wherein the only ingress to and egress from the DNA manipulation zone is through the first and second valves... The complaint alleges the DNA manipulation zone of the Accused Products is isolated in this manner. ¶69 col. 3:5-7
wherein the computer-controlled heat source is in thermal contact with the DNA manipulation zone; and wherein the detector is configured to identify one or more polynucleotides within the DNA manipulation zone. The complaint alleges the Accused Products possess a thermally-coupled heat source and a detector for this purpose. ¶69 col. 3:8-12

’069 Patent Infringement Allegations

Claim Element (from Independent Claim 1) Alleged Infringing Functionality Complaint Citation Patent Citation
A method of amplifying a nucleic acid-containing sample within a microfluidic device, the method comprising: moving the sample from an upstream channel...into a DNA manipulation module...the only ingress to and egress from the DNA manipulation zone being through the first valve and the second valve; The complaint alleges that use of the Accused Products involves performing this step but does not describe the specific fluidic pathway. ¶80 col. 33:34-45
receiving the sample in the DNA manipulation zone; The complaint alleges that this step is performed during the operation of the Accused Products. ¶80 col. 33:46-46
closing the first valve and the second valve such that gas and liquid are prevented from flowing into or out of the DNA manipulation zone; and The complaint alleges that the Accused Products perform this valve-closing step to isolate the sample. ¶80 col. 33:47-50
thermal cycling the sample in the DNA manipulation zone. The complaint alleges that the Accused Products perform thermal cycling on the isolated sample. ¶80 col. 33:51-52

Identified Points of Contention

  • Structural Equivalence: For the ’308 Patent, a central question may be whether the accused NeuMoDx systems contain a "DNA manipulation module" with the specific claimed architecture. The analysis may focus on whether the accused devices truly have a reaction zone where the only ingress and egress is through the claimed first and second valves, and whether they contain a "vent" that is "separated from the upstream channel by the first and second valves."
  • Evidentiary Proof of Method Steps: For the ’069 Patent, which claims a method, the analysis will likely require evidence showing that the Accused Products, when operated, actually perform the recited sequence of steps. This raises the question of what evidence Plaintiffs will present to demonstrate the internal operations of the accused systems, such as the precise timing and function of the valve closures relative to sample movement and thermal cycling.

V. Key Claim Terms for Construction

"a vent... separated from the upstream channel by the first and second valves" (’308 Patent, Claim 1)

  • Context and Importance: This term defines a specific structural relationship within the microfluidic device. The construction of "vent" and its required separation from the main channel by two valves will be critical, as Defendants may argue their systems use a different venting mechanism or lack this specific isolated arrangement, thereby avoiding infringement. Practitioners may focus on this term because its precise structural requirements could be a key point of non-infringement if the accused device achieves venting through a more generalized or differently located mechanism.
  • Intrinsic Evidence for Interpretation:
    • Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: The specification does not appear to provide an explicit definition of "vent." A party might argue that any feature that allows gas to escape to equalize pressure would meet the definition, as long as it meets the location requirement.
    • Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: The embodiments shown in the patent figures, such as Figure 4 (element 202), illustrate the vent as a distinct channel leading away from the DNA manipulation module. A party could argue the term should be limited to such a dedicated channel structure, rather than a simple opening or a porous membrane.

"wherein the only ingress to and egress from the DNA manipulation zone is through the first and second valves" (’308 Patent, Claim 1; ’069 Patent, Claim 1)

  • Context and Importance: This negative limitation requires complete isolation of the reaction zone by the two valves. This is central to the invention's goal of creating discrete, sealed reaction chambers. Infringement requires proof that no other fluidic paths (e.g., leaks, secondary vents, or porous materials) allow gas or liquid to enter or exit the zone during amplification.
  • Intrinsic Evidence for Interpretation:
    • Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: A party might argue that "only" should be interpreted functionally, meaning that any other potential paths are inconsequential and do not materially affect the isolation of the sample during the reaction, thus reading on devices with minor, non-functional leaks.
    • Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: The patent emphasizes creating a "closed reaction chamber" (’308 Patent, Abstract). The plain language of "the only" suggests a strict structural requirement. A party could argue that if any other path for fluid or gas exists, no matter how small, this limitation is not met.

VI. Other Allegations

Indirect Infringement

  • The complaint alleges induced infringement under § 271(b) by asserting that Defendants provide the Accused Products with instructions for use (e.g., user manuals for the NeuMoDx Cartridge) that lead customers to operate them in an infringing manner (Compl. ¶73, ¶82). The complaint alleges contributory infringement under § 271(c), stating the Accused Products are a material component of the patented combinations, are not staple articles of commerce, and have no substantial non-infringing uses (Compl. ¶74, ¶83).

Willful Infringement

  • Willfulness is alleged based on both pre- and post-suit knowledge. The complaint alleges pre-suit knowledge based on several grounds: (1) key NeuMoDx founders are named inventors on the asserted patents from their time at HandyLab; (2) NeuMoDx cited the asserted patents during the prosecution of its own patents; (3) NeuMoDx allegedly conducted a third-party patent review that identified the asserted patents as relevant; and (4) QIAGEN conducted due diligence on NeuMoDx's technology and filed IPR petitions against the ’708 and ’900 patents prior to the lawsuit (Compl. ¶16, ¶22, ¶41, ¶76, ¶85).

VII. Analyst’s Conclusion: Key Questions for the Case

This case presents a dispute over foundational technologies in automated microfluidic diagnostics between a major incumbent and a newer entrant founded by the incumbent's former inventors, now acquired by a major competitor. The litigation will likely focus on the following central questions:

  • A core issue will be one of structural and methodological identity: Can Plaintiffs prove that the internal microfluidic architecture and operational sequences of the NeuMoDx systems meet the specific, multi-element limitations of the asserted claims? The dispute may turn on detailed expert testimony regarding whether features like the accused valves and vents are structurally and functionally equivalent to what is claimed, particularly the negative limitation requiring the reaction zone to be sealed exclusively by the claimed valves.
  • A key question will be the impact of the shared history: The complaint alleges that NeuMoDx was founded by former HandyLab inventors who developed the patented technology. This history, combined with allegations of pre-suit IPRs and patent citations, creates a significant risk of a willfulness finding for Defendants if infringement is found. This context may also subtly influence how the court views the technical arguments and the equities of the case.
  • A central question will be claim scope and validity in a crowded field: Given the number of patents asserted and the dense patent landscape for molecular diagnostics, the validity of the asserted claims, particularly in light of the IPR proceedings mentioned in the complaint, will be a critical battleground. The construction of key terms like "vent" and the scope of the method steps will likely be dispositive for both infringement and validity analyses.