NeuroGrafix Launches National Multi-Litigation in MRI/DTI Patent Dispute
Actions Filed Against the United States/NIH, Johns Hopkins, Brigham/Harvard, Columbia and Cornell
November 2, 2012
LOS ANGELES — Today, NeuroGrafix filed two additional lawsuits in Federal District Court in New York accusing Cornell University and Columbia University of patent infringement, following on a New York filing against the Hospital for Special Surgery October 25th.
Over the past three months, NeuroGrafix has filed patent infringement actions against the United States of America (National Institutes of Health and other agencies), Boston hospitals Brigham and Women’s, & Beth Israel, Tufts and Boston University as well as against Johns Hopkins University and University of Chicago. Additional actions were filed against Philips and BrainLab. GE has filed a declaratory judgment action against NeuroGrafix in Federal Court in Los Angeles and has intervened in the ongoing patent infringement litigation there between NeuroGrafix and the University of California in relation to its obligations to indemnify it’s customers in matters of patent infringement.
NeuroGrafix CEO Dr. Aaron Filler states: “Defense of patent rights for inventors is enshrined in Article I of the United States Constitution. The nation’s founders believed this was an even more fundamental right than the contents of the Bill of Rights which was passed later. As I have outlined in my recently published book The Smart Guide to Patents, patent rights powered the economic growth of England and then of the United States, Japan and Germany. From their legal inception in in the 1400’s and their codification in the 1600’s and 1700’s and into the modern day they are relevant, legitimate and critical to economic growth. However, there are always interested non-inventors ready to argue that these rights and inventions should be taken without providing any benefit to the inventor.”
“The “America Invents Act” (AIA) signed by President Obama in 2011 makes it even more difficult for inventors. An example, which flows from one of the numerous anti-inventor components of that legislation, is pressure placed on the individual inventor to file numerous separate lawsuits to defend valid rights. Inventors are a minority, but actions and laws emerging from the non-inventive majority with the purpose of taking innovations from inventors are against the best interests of the nation as a whole. The Obama administration has launched the most aggressive and comprehensive attack in US history against the individual inventor. The legislation – which also ended Americas unique and successful “First to Invent” law – is detailed in the AIA rules described in The Smart Guide to Patents.”
“In this invention we produced and published the first Diffusion anisotropy tractogram years before anyone else. The underlying math of tensor analysis was published years earlier. Details of the history and science of the invention appear in Dr. Filler’s articles:
Filler AG. The history, development and impact of computed imaging in neurological diagnosis and neurosurgery: CT, MRI, DTI. Internet Journal of Neurosurgery, 7:(1) (2010)
Filler AG. MR Neurography and Diffusion Tensor Imaging: Origins, history, & clinical impact of the first 50,000 cases with an assessment of efficacy and utility in a prospective 5,000 patient study group. Neurosurgery 65: (4 Suppl), pA29-A43 (2009).
Dr. Filler’s CV is available online
“These inventions have saved thousands of lives, relieved thousands from pain and have powered billions of dollars of economic growth.”
“The United States needs to recognize that seizing intellectual property from inventors without compensation is a harm that we cannot afford as a nation – it will only lead to a downward economic spiral as other nations take the lead in innovation.”