Case Explained: BOSTON SCIENTIFIC CORP v. STRYKER CORPORATION

Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit Filed: 2026-06-17 The Federal Circuit affirmed the district court’s denial of a preliminary injunction sought by Boston Scientific Corp. and Relievant Medsystems, Inc. against Stryker Corporation regarding the launch of Stryker’s OptaBlate BVN product. The court held that Boston Scientific failed to demonstrate a likelihood of success on the merits of its induced infringement claims under 35 U.S.C. § 271(b) for claims 16 and 21 of U.S. Patent No. 12,303,166. The court applied the standard that a preliminary injunction requires the movant to show there is no substantial question as to infringement or validity. Reviewing the denial for abuse of discretion, the Federal Circuit found that the district court correctly determined substantial questions existed regarding both claim construction and factual application. Specifically, the term “reaches” in the patent claims was facially ambiguous as to whether it required physical contact with the cancellous bone or merely proximity. The record showed no substantive argument or evidence presented to the district court to resolve this ambiguity, and intrinsic evidence from the specification did not definitively support Boston Scientific’s broader interpretation. Furthermore, regarding the application of the tentative construction, the court found that Stryker’s training materials and instructions were ambiguous as to whether they instructed physicians to place the device’s access cannula tip in physical contact with the cancellous bone or merely inside the vertebral body. This ambiguity raised a substantial question of infringement. Additionally, Boston Scientific forfeited its doctrine of equivalents argument by raising it only in a footnote without elaboration, and even if considered, the record contained conflicting expert testimony regarding whether the difference in device placement was insubstantial. As a result of this affirmation, Stryker is not enjoined from launching or marketing its OptaBlate BVN product at this time. The case proceeds to trial where the parties may present additional evidence and argument for formal claim construction and a final determination on infringement. Costs are awarded to Stryker. Do It For The Case Law is a news reporting service. Nothing in this episode constitutes legal advice.