KEVIN T. LAVERY v. PURSUANT HEALTH, INC. - Articles

All Content

KEVIN T. LAVERY v. PURSUANT HEALTH, INC.

Posted by: Azya Thornton on Jan 29, 2025

Court: 6th Circuit Court (Published Opinions)

Attorneys 1: ARGUED: Bradley L. Smith, ENDURANCE LAW GROUP PLC, Jackson, Michigan, for Appellant.

Attorneys 2: ARGUED: Adam H. Charnes, KILPATRICK TOWNSEND & STOCKTON LLP, Dallas, Texas, for Appellee.

Attorneys 3: ON BRIEF: Bradley L. Smith, ENDURANCE LAW GROUP PLC, Jackson, Michigan, for Appellant.

Attorneys 4: ON BRIEF: Adam H. Charnes, KILPATRICK TOWNSEND & STOCKTON LLP, Dallas, Texas, Joel D. Bush, II, Bennett T. Richardson, KILPATRICK TOWNSEND & STOCKTON LLP, Atlanta, Georgia, for Appellee.

Judge(s): SUTTON, Chief Judge; MURPHY and BLOOMEKATZ, Circuit Judges

Court Appealed: Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan at Detroit

SUTTON, Chief Judge. Kevin Lavery invented a vision screening device and contracted with Pursuant Health, a company that makes vision screening kiosks, to sell it. He transferred his patent to the company in exchange for royalties on its kiosk sales. When Lavery’s patent expired and Pursuant Health stopped paying him, he sued. The district court ruled that the expiration of his patent made the royalty unenforceable and granted summary judgment to Pursuant Health. We affirm.

Attachments: