FOLLOW US

A Delaware jury just handed down a verdict that reads like a split decision in a boxing match — one side claiming most of the rounds, the other landing the single punch that mattered most financially. Biomedical testing manufacturer Beckman Coulter walked away Friday with roughly $56 million in combined damages after jurors found that rival Cytek Biosciences infringed one of its patents covering technology used to rapidly analyze individual cells.

The Verdict, Broken Down

After five days of trial, the jury determined that U.S. Patent No. 10,330,582 is valid and that Cytek's flow cytometers and related products infringe one specific claim within it. That single finding carried a hefty price tag: jurors awarded Beckman $36.11 million in royalties and an additional $20 million in lost profits.

A Mixed Bag for Both Sides

The outcome wasn't a clean sweep, however. The same jury found that other claims Beckman had asserted under U.S. Patent Nos. 11,703,443 and 12,174,107 were either invalid or simply not infringed by Cytek — meaning the win, while financially significant, came on far narrower legal grounds than Beckman had originally pursued.

Cytek's Reading of the Result

Cytek didn't shy away from framing the verdict its own way in a Friday statement, emphasizing a nuance in how the jury reached its infringement finding. The company noted that on the one claim it lost, jurors found no literal infringement — but instead ruled infringement occurred under the legal doctrine of equivalents, a more nuanced standard used when a product doesn't precisely match a patent's language but functions similarly enough to still count as infringing.

"Cytek intends to pursue post-verdict motions challenging the finding of infringement under the doctrine of equivalents and the related damages award," the company said, adding that the verdict "does not require any changes to the company's current product offerings or operations, and Cytek's spectral flow cytometry products remain available to customers worldwide."

Counsel for Beckman Coulter, a subsidiary of Danaher Corp., didn't immediately respond to a request for comment late Friday.

The Products at the Center of the Fight

According to jury instructions, California-based Beckman had targeted a wide range of Cytek products, including the Cytek Aurora, Aurora CS, Aurora Evo and Northern Lights flow cytometers. Specifically, Beckman took issue with kits and modules that let users expand these cytometers with additional colors and channels — features central to how the machines analyze increasingly complex cell samples. Cytek, notably, is also headquartered in California, making this something of a hometown rivalry playing out in a Delaware courtroom.

Competing Platforms in a High-Stakes Market

Beckman markets its own competing CytoFLEX platform, positioning both companies' products as advanced cell-profiling systems used heavily in immunology and oncology research. Beckman originally filed suit in August 2024, with Cytek denying infringement throughout and separately arguing that Beckman's asserted patent claims were invalid to begin with, according to the jury instructions.

The Road to Trial

U.S. District Judge Colm F. Connolly denied Cytek's bid for summary judgment back in July, clearing the path for the case to proceed to trial, according to the case docket. The trial itself kicked off Aug. 17, culminating in Friday's split verdict after five days of testimony and deliberation.

Cytek's CEO Weighs In

Cytek CEO Wenbin Jiang struck a notably upbeat tone despite the damages award, highlighting the broader legal landscape of the case. "We are pleased that the jury found in our favor on the substantial majority of claims in this case, including findings of noninfringement and invalidity as to three of the four asserted claims," Jiang said in Friday's statement.

A Fight That's Far From Over

Jiang made clear the company has no intention of accepting the one adverse finding quietly. "We fundamentally disagree with the single remaining finding and damages award and intend to pursue all available post-trial remedies, including potentially an appeal to the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit," he said. He further defended the company's underlying technology, stating, "Cytek independently developed a fundamentally different approach to flow cytometry when we pioneered full spectrum profiling technology."

The Patents in Dispute

The patents at the center of the litigation are U.S. Patent Nos. 10,330,582, 11,703,443 and 12,174,107.

The Legal Teams

Beckman Coulter is represented by Robert J. Gunther, Omar A. Khan, Jeffrey Dennhardt, Lauren E. Matlock-Colangelo, Jennifer Graber, Maggie Sawin, Kelly A. Todd, Khalil Waddell, James M. Dowd and Tom Saunders of WilmerHale, along with Frederick L. Cottrell III, Kelly E. Farnan, Christine D. Haynes and Gabriela Z. Monasterio of Richards Layton & Finger PA.

Cytek is represented by Karen Jacobs, Jeremy A. Tigan and Cameron P. Clark of Morris Nichols Arsht & Tunnell LLP, along with Reuben Chen, HanByul Chang, Juan Pablo Gonzalez, Alexandra Leeper, Elizabeth M. Flanagan, Adam Pivovar, Dustin M. Knight and David Yun of Cooley LLP.