Mammography vendor Fischer Imaging and former Trex Medical parent Thermo Electron have settled a patent infringement lawsuit involving Fischer's Mammotest stereotactic breast biopsy system. Denver-based Fischer had sued Trex Medical and Hologic, which purchased the Trex assets in September 2000.
Under the settlement, Fischer has received $25 million in cash from Trex Medical and will also receive $7.2 million in license payments through the patents' remaining term for Hologic's existing breast biopsy system, according to Fischer. The license will be paid in equal annual installments over the next eight years, according to the vendor.
Fischer said it would recognize the settlement over the original patent life of 17 years, resulting in a one-time gain of approximately $19.2 million and future annual license fees of about $1.9 million. The license covers Hologic's existing breast biopsy system, but does not necessarily extend to any new breast biopsy system the Waltham, MA-based firm might market in the future, Fischer said.
By AuntMinnie.com staff writersJune 11, 2002
Related Reading
Knudson named Fischer CEO, April 19, 2002
Fischer net income rises despite revenue decline, February 13, 2002
Fischer files European patent infringement suit against Hologic, December 13, 2001
Fischer gets CE Mark for FFDM system, November 28, 2001
FFDM gains legitimacy as vendors clear regulatory hurdles, November 25, 2001
Copyright © 2002 AuntMinnie.com
![A normal mammogram confirmed by three-year radiologic follow-up illustrates reader-marked regions of interest (ROIs) during (A) unaided (round 1) and (B) artificial intelligence (AI)–assisted (round 2) reading. Each colored dot represents an ROI for recall by a human reader. Readers could mark more than one ROI per case, represented by multiple dots of the same color. During AI-assisted reading, the AI system displayed three visible prompts: two with suspicion of malignancy scores of 35% (left mediolateral oblique [L MLO] and craniocaudal [L CC]) and one with a suspicion of malignancy score of 10% (right craniocaudal [R CC]), shown as polygonal overlays. Without AI, six of 10 readers (60%) marked a false-positive ROI. With AI assistance, this fell to two of 10 (20%). R MLO = right mediolateral oblique.](https://img.auntminnie.com/mindful/smg/workspaces/default/uploads/2026/07/2026-07-14-radiology-mammogram-ai-auto-bias.H0bYO8QlWs.jpg?auto=format%2Ccompress&fit=crop&h=100&q=70&w=100)







![A normal mammogram confirmed by three-year radiologic follow-up illustrates reader-marked regions of interest (ROIs) during (A) unaided (round 1) and (B) artificial intelligence (AI)–assisted (round 2) reading. Each colored dot represents an ROI for recall by a human reader. Readers could mark more than one ROI per case, represented by multiple dots of the same color. During AI-assisted reading, the AI system displayed three visible prompts: two with suspicion of malignancy scores of 35% (left mediolateral oblique [L MLO] and craniocaudal [L CC]) and one with a suspicion of malignancy score of 10% (right craniocaudal [R CC]), shown as polygonal overlays. Without AI, six of 10 readers (60%) marked a false-positive ROI. With AI assistance, this fell to two of 10 (20%). R MLO = right mediolateral oblique.](https://img.auntminnie.com/mindful/smg/workspaces/default/uploads/2026/07/2026-07-14-radiology-mammogram-ai-auto-bias.H0bYO8QlWs.jpg?auto=format%2Ccompress&fit=crop&h=112&q=70&w=112)









