Printer Friendly
The Free Library
4,548,460 articles and books
Member login
User name  
Password 
 
Join us Forgot password?

AngioDynamics Comments on Declaratory Judgment Decision by Court.


QUEENSBURY, N.Y. -- AngioDynamics, Inc. (NASDAQ:ANGO ANGO - Algemene Nederlandse Gehandicapten Organisatie (Dutch: Equal Opportunities for Persons with Disabilities)) today commented on a decision in the U.S. District Court for Delaware concerning a declaratory judgment declaratory judgment n. a judgment of a court which determines the rights of parties without ordering anything be done or awarding damages. While this borders on the prohibited "advisory opinion," it is allowed to nip controversies in the bud. Examples: a party to a contract may seek the legal interpretation of a contract to determine the parties' rights, or a corporation may ask a court to decide whether a new tax is truly applicable to that business action brought by AngioDynamics against Diomed, Inc. This case is unrelated to the ongoing litigation brought by Diomed against AngioDynamics and others regarding the '777 patent.

On September 7, 2006, U.S. District Judge Gregory Sleet sleet, precipitation of small, partially melted grains of ice. As raindrops fall from clouds, they pass through layers of air at different temperatures. If they pass through a layer with a temperature below the freezing point, they turn into sleet. Snowflakes that have melted by passing through a warm layer will turn into sleet if they then pass through a freezing layer. denied AngioDynamics' request to bring a declaratory judgment action against Diomed regarding two patents (U.S. patent numbers 6,981,971 and 6,986,766) recently issued to Diomed. These patents relate to a medical device and method that includes graduated markings along a sheath. AngioDynamics brought this case in January 2006, due to concerns that Diomed would wrongly sue AngioDynamics for infringement, in particular regarding the AngioDynamics VenaCure product. If the court had granted the request, the case would have proceeded to trial, providing AngioDynamics with an opportunity to prove these patents are invalid. Rather than hearing the case, the court denied AngioDynamics' request to bring action at this time, stating that, under the circumstances, there was not sufficient evidence of a threat of litigation by Diomed, thus there was no basis for allowing the case to proceed.

"While we are disappointed that the court chose not to hear this case at this time, we are very confident that if any action is initiated against AngioDynamics by Diomed regarding these patents, the patents will be proven invalid in light of very significant prior art and other factors," commented Eamonn P. Hobbs, president and chief executive officer of AngioDynamics.

About VenaCure

The VenaCure endovascular laser venous system is a patient-friendly, minimally invasive alternative for the treatment of severe varicose veins. The VenaCure procedure, which lasts about 45 minutes, offers patients an effective outpatient alternative to surgical ligation and vein stripping. The Company markets and sells the VenaCure laser system throughout the United States.

About AngioDynamics

AngioDynamics, Inc. is a leading provider of innovative medical devices used by interventional radiologists, vascular surgeons and other physicians for the minimally invasive diagnosis and treatment of peripheral vascular disease. AngioDynamics, Inc. designs, develops, manufactures and markets a broad line of therapeutic and diagnostic devices that enable interventional physicians, such as interventional radiologists, vascular surgeons and others, to treat peripheral vascular diseases and other non-coronary diseases. The Company's diverse product line includes angiographic products and accessories, dialysis products, vascular access products, PTA products, drainage products, thrombolytic products, and venous products. More information is available at www.angiodynamics.com.

The statements made in this document contain certain forward-looking statements that involve a number of risks and uncertainties. Words such as "expects," "intends," "anticipates," "plans," "believes," "seeks," "estimates," or variations of such words and similar expressions, are intended to identify such forward-looking statements. Investors are cautioned that actual events or results may differ from the Company's expectations. In addition to the matters described above, the ability of the Company to develop its products, future actions by the FDA or other regulatory agencies, results of pending or future clinical trials, overall economic conditions, general market conditions, market acceptance, foreign currency exchange rate fluctuations, the effects on pricing from group purchasing organizations, competition as well as the risk factors listed from time to time in the SEC filings of AngioDynamics, Inc., including but not limited to its Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended June 3, 2006, may affect the actual results achieved by the Company.
COPYRIGHT 2006 Business Wire
No portion of this article can be reproduced without the express written permission from the copyright holder.
Copyright 2006, Gale Group. All rights reserved. Gale Group is a Thomson Corporation Company.

 Reader Opinion

Title:

Comment:



 

Article Details
Printer friendly Cite/link Email Feedback
Comment:AngioDynamics Comments on Declaratory Judgment Decision by Court.
Publication:Business Wire
Geographic Code:1USA
Date:Sep 8, 2006
Words:569
Previous Article:The New York Times to Publish Special 9/11 Section on Fifth Anniversary of Terrorist Attacks; Appearing on September 11, 2006, ``Broken Ground'' Will...
Next Article:Southwall Technologies Inc. Announces R. Eugene Goodson to Serve as President and Chief Executive Officer.
Topics:



Related Articles
U.S. Appeals Court: RULES.(Brief Article)
U.S. Appeals Court: FREE SPEECH.(Brief Article)
[0] U.S. Appeals Court: RULES.(Brief Article)
U.S. Appeals Court: CLASSIFICATION RACIAL DISCRIMIN.(Brief Article)
U.S. Appeals Court: RACIAL DISCRIMIN.(Brief Article)
U.S. Appeals Court: TELEPHONE.(Brief Article)
Administrative Segregation.(prisoner litigation)(Brief Article)
Blooper producer claims company withheld payment. (Law).
Cooking school gains from loose definition.(Up Front)(overtime pay case)(Brief Article)
Second court rejects lawsuit to block casino.(Courts)(People Against a Casino Town says the decision "is not unanticipated" and that a third suit...

Terms of use | Copyright © 2008 Farlex, Inc. | Feedback | For webmasters | Submit articles