Bausch Eye Vitamin Case Should Go To Jury, Judge Says

By Adam Lidgett · March 18, 2025, 8:19 PM EDT

The maker of eye care product MacularProtect shouldn't get a ruling clearing it from allegations it infringed Bausch & Lomb patents related to its PreserVision vitamin based on a doctrine allowing patent holders...

To view the full article, register now.

Try a seven day FREE Trial

Already a subscriber? Click here to login

Documents

Report and Recommendation

Case Information

Case Title

Bausch & Lomb Incorporated et al v. SBH Holdings LLC

Case Number

Court

Delaware

Nature of Suit

Patent

Date Filed

October 28, 2020

Recent Articles By Adam

March 18, 2025
AI Healthcare Co. Accuses Test-Maker Of Infringing Patents
January 22, 2025
Vanda Loses Takings Clause Arguments In Trade Secret Fight
January 06, 2025
Biotech Trade Secrets Case Gets New Punitive Damages Trial
January 02, 2025
Hikma Wants Extension At High Court In Skinny Label Case
December 12, 2024
Medicare Could Lose Billions From 'Patent Abuse,' Group Says
December 09, 2024
High Court Won't Hear Zimmer Biomet Royalties Fight
November 18, 2024
Medical Group Wants Justices To Review IP Safe Harbor Fight
November 01, 2024
Jury To Decide Timing Issue In Insulin Patch Trade Secret Row
October 22, 2024
Patent Office Finds Public Engagement Leader
September 23, 2024
Fed. Circ. OKs Novartis Loss In Eye Syringe Patent Feud