Illumina Wins $26.7M Verdict in Prenatal Testing Case Against Ariosa
A federal jury found that Ariosa's Harmony test infringed two of Illumina's gene-sequencing patents and left open the possibility of an injunction barring the latest version of the test.
January 25, 2018 at 03:50 PM
2 minute read
SAN FRANCISCO — In a high-stakes litigation showdown in the burgeoning market for non-invasive prenatal testing, Illumina Inc. has scored a patent infringement verdict against rival Ariosa Diagnostics.
A federal jury found that Ariosa's Harmony test infringed two of Illumina's gene-sequencing patents. The jury awarded $26.7 million in damages, about a quarter of the $104 million Illumina wanted. Perhaps more importantly, the jury found that the latest version of Ariosa's test infringes Illumina's patented gene-sequencing technology. That finding leaves open the possibility that Illumina can seek an injunction from U.S. District Judge Susan Illston of the Northern District of California.
The jury verdict, which came after two weeks of trial in Illston's courtroom, is a milestone in the legal fight between the business-partners-turned-rivals. The parties and their affiliates have fought at the Federal Circuit five times and at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board at least five more times over the past half-decade.
Illumina's lead lawyer, Edward Reines of Weil, Gotshal & Manges, wasn't immediately available for comment.
Ariosa's lead lawyer, Irell & Manella's David Gindler, declined to comment.
San Diego-based Illumina claimed its DNA sequencing and patents have been licensed by all major lab testing companies that perform NIPT—screenings for genetic defects that analyzes mothers' blood samples rather than a more invasive procedure involving extracting amniotic fluid. At trial, Weil's Reines said that most in the industry pay about $75 per test to license Illumina's technology. Reines painted Ariosa as the exception and accused it of undercutting Illumina's licensees by offering the Harmony test at artificially deflated prices.
Irell's Gindler argued Ariosa had a license to one of the patents by virtue of a supply agreement it had with Illumina to provide gene-sequencing supplies. He also argued that Illumina acted in bad faith by timing the lawsuit to scuttle Ariosa's initial public offering.
Jurors rejected those arguments and declined to award Ariosa anything on its counterclaims. The jury, however, declined to find that Ariosa willfully infringed Illumina's patents, a finding that would have left open the possibility that Illston could triple the damages figure.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View All'Where Were the Lawyers?' Judge Blocks Trump's Birthright Citizenship Order
3 minute readNetflix Music Guru Becomes First GC of Startup Helping Independent Artists Monetize Catalogs
2 minute readK&L Gates Files String of Suits Against Electronics Manufacturer's Competitors, Brightness Misrepresentations
3 minute readHolland & Knight Hires Former Davis Wright Tremaine Managing Partner in Seattle
3 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Inside Track: AI Is Sure to Fray Big Law's Devotion to Billable Hour
- 2Evidence Explained: Prevailing Attorney Outlines Successful Defense in Inmate Death Case
- 3The Week in Data Jan. 24: A Look at Legal Industry Trends by the Numbers
- 4The Use of Psychologists as Coaches/Trial Consultants
- 5Could This Be the Era of Client-Centricity?
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250