A federal jury in Delaware returned a split verdict on Aug. 21 in Beckman Coulter's patent suit against Cytek Biosciences, finding three of four asserted claims both not infringed and invalid, and finding the fourth infringed only under the doctrine of equivalents. The jury put past damages on that single claim at $20 million in lost profits and $36 million in royalties. Cytek says it will file post-verdict motions and may appeal to the Federal Circuit, and that none of its spectral flow cytometers change as a result.
- Case: Beckman Coulter, Inc. v. Cytek Biosciences, Inc., No. 1:24-cv-00945, US District Court for the District of Delaware, Judge Colm F. Connolly.
- Filed: Aug. 15, 2024. Beckman's corporate-disclosure statement names Danaher Corporation as its parent.
- Verdict: Aug. 21, 2026, after a five-day jury trial scheduled to open Aug. 17.
- Outcome: noninfringement and invalidity on three claims, and infringement under the doctrine of equivalents, but not literal infringement, on one.
- Damages: $20 million lost profits plus $36 million royalties, past damages only.
- Next: Cytek post-verdict motions and a possible appeal to the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit.
Two patents in the original complaint
Beckman Coulter sued Cytek in August 2024, and the court's patent report filed the same day lists US Patents 10,330,582 and 11,703,443. Beckman amended its complaint in January 2025, and Cytek answered with counterclaims. Cytek's release does not identify which patents or claims went to the jury, and Law360 described the patent at issue as covering "a technology that quickly analyzes single cells." The scheduling order set a Markman hearing for July 16, 2025, and the trial date had been fixed in November 2024 for Aug. 17, 2026.
Cytek's release presented the outcome as a win on the bulk 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," said Wenbin Jiang, PhD, the company's CEO. "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. Cytek independently developed a fundamentally different approach to flow cytometry when we pioneered Full Spectrum Profiling technology."
No change to the instruments on the bench
Cytek said the verdict "does not require any changes to the Company's current product offerings or operations," and that its spectral cytometers remain on sale worldwide. The product line named in the release runs from the Aurora, Aurora CS, Aurora Evo and Borealis systems to the Northern Lights instruments and the Amnis and Guava brands. Nearly all of it is sold for research use only, and the release notes that the Northern Lights-CLC system and certain reagents are cleared for clinical use only in China and the European Union.
No statement from Beckman Coulter or Danaher on the verdict could be located at the time of writing, and the damages split reported here comes from Cytek's release, with Law360's headline putting the total at $56 million, since the verdict form itself was not available on the public docket when this article was prepared.
Why This Matters to the APO|APE Reader
Laboratories with Aurora or Northern Lights instruments on the bench have no service or supply interruption to plan for, which was the operational question the release was written to answer. The exposure still open is spelled out in Cytek's own forward-looking statement, which lists injunctive relief and "ongoing royalty obligations as determined by the court" among the possible outcomes of the post-trial phase. A court-set running royalty on the surviving claim would attach to future instrument sales, and that figure, if it comes, will matter more to purchasing committees than the $56 million in past damages.
Sources
- Jury Finds in Cytek's Favor on Three of Four Asserted Claims; Company to Challenge Remaining Finding. Cytek Biosciences press release, August 21, 2026
- Beckman Coulter, Inc. v. Cytek Biosciences, Inc., No. 1:24-cv-00945 (D. Del.), docket. CourtListener, accessed August 22, 2026
- Cytek Hit With $56M Verdict For Infringing Cell-Sorting Patent. Law360, August 21, 2026
