Search for: "ZIMMER INC" Results 161 - 180 of 313
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
4 Jan 2010, 7:24 am by Matt Sundquist
Feldman of the Tulane Sports Law Program analyzes the questions raised by a different case: American Needle Inc. v. [read post]
10 Feb 2017, 5:30 am by Kenneth J. Vanko
Zimmer Biomet, No. 1:16-cv-01670, a California federal district court found a public-policy rift between Michigan and California law concerning non-competes. [read post]
20 Oct 2015, 12:17 pm by Joe Mullin
Zimmer Inc., a medical device case hinging on the same damages issues. [read post]
17 Sep 2010, 3:55 am by Bob Kraft
" Bloomberg News (9/14, Cortez) reports that "investigators analyzed a database of payments from J&J's DePuy unit, Stryker, Zimmer Holdings Inc., Biomet and Smith & Nephew Plc, and cross referenced their findings with disclosures on medical journal articles written by the top-paid consultants. [read post]
17 Sep 2010, 3:42 am by Bob Kraft
” Bloomberg News (9/14, Cortez) reports that “investigators analyzed a database of payments from J&J’s DePuy unit, Stryker, Zimmer Holdings Inc., Biomet and Smith & Nephew Plc, and cross referenced their findings with disclosures on medical journal articles written by the top-paid consultants. [read post]
2 Mar 2009, 2:30 am
. - a panel discussion regarding the best ways for protecting a client's interests (whether the individual or the company) in an invention assignment agreement following DDB Technologies, featuring Mike Baniak of McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff, and Todd Dawson, Vice President of Legal Affairs at Zimmer, Inc. [read post]
25 Jun 2010, 10:24 am by Tom Casagrande
Tex. before filing a patent suit there against an Indiana company.In In re Zimmer Holdings, Inc., No. 2010-M938 (Fed. [read post]
7 Apr 2012, 10:29 am
Manufacturers of the devices include Johnson & Johnson (JNJ), Zimmer Holdings Inc. [read post]
14 Aug 2008, 11:00 am
Zimmer Holdings, Inc., 2008 WL 3153442, at *5-6 (N.D. [read post]
15 Oct 2011, 6:49 am
“The mere presence of [other safety devices] somewhere at the work site” does not satisfy defendant’s duty to provide appropriate safety devices (Zimmer v Chemung County Performing Arts, 65 NY2d 513, 524, rearg denied 65 NY2d 1054; see Williams v City of Niagara Falls, 43 AD3d 1426; Whiting v Dave Hennig, Inc., 28 AD3d 1105, 1106). [read post]