Heartflow v. Cleerly

Background

Heartflow filed a patent infringement action against Cleerly in the Eastern District of Texas alleging that Cleerly’s competing cardiac imaging platform was built in the same technological field as Heartflow’s long-developed non-invasive coronary disease diagnostic business and that the dispute is closely tied to Dr James K. Min’s earlier role as a Heartflow consultant from 2012 to 2017, during which Heartflow says he was subject to confidentiality, non-compete, and invention-assignment obligations before later incorporating Cleerly. The complaint presents Heartflow as the developer of an FDA-cleared and CMS-recognised cardiac diagnostics platform and alleges that Cleerly later entered the same market with competing products while also pleading venue in the district through Cleerly’s alleged imaging locations and business activity in Texas (ECF No. 1).

AI Interaction

Heartflow says Cleerly’s AI-powered coronary CT analysis products use machine learning and related computational methods to analyse plaque, stenosis, vessel geometry, blood-flow-related characteristics, ischemia, and cardiac risk in ways that infringe six Heartflow patents covering image segmentation, estimation of blood flow characteristics from vessel geometry and physiology, plaque vulnerability prediction, numerical vascular evaluation, correction of artificial deformation in anatomic modelling, and digital image processing to estimate vessel characteristics. The complaint identifies Cleerly Plaque Analysis, Cleerly ISCHEMIA, and Cleerly COMPARE as the accused products and alleges direct, induced, contributory, and willful infringement, linking that theory to Dr Min’s alleged access to Heartflow’s confidential technical information and to Cleerly’s alleged knowledge of Heartflow’s patent portfolio. (ECF No. 1)