Search for: "BOSTON SCIENTIFIC V MEDTRONIC" Results 41 - 60 of 135
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
11 Jun 2018, 8:53 am by Dennis Crouch
Boston Scientific Corp., 561 F.3d 1319 (Fed. [read post]
23 Aug 2013, 11:09 am
Boston Scientific Corp., 695 F.3d 1266 (Fed. [read post]
26 Jan 2012, 1:07 pm by Bexis
Boston Scientific Corp., 2010 WL 672135, at *4 (E.D. [read post]
12 Oct 2010, 2:56 pm by David Walk
Bennett was a sales rep for Boston Scientific for all of four months and then filed five qui tam actions against seven medical device companies, including Medtronic. [read post]
17 Apr 2012, 10:02 am by Michelle Yeary
Boston Scientific Corp., 631 F.3d 762, 775-76 (5th Cir. 2011) which reached an opposite conclusion. [read post]
9 May 2013, 6:34 pm by Mary Dwyer
Boston Scientific Corp.12-1128Issue: Whether, in a declaratory judgment action brought by a licensee under MedImmune, Inc. v. [read post]
1 Apr 2014, 12:38 pm
Boston Scientific Corp., 631 F.3d 762, 775 (5th Cir. 2011)), was required to allow such a claim. [read post]
15 Jan 2007, 8:14 am
Boston Scientific (J) $613 - NTP v. [read post]
30 Jul 2014, 9:23 am by Dennis Crouch
Boston Scientific (burden of proving infringement always falls on patentee even in licensee DJ actions). [read post]
8 Nov 2013, 8:01 am by Eugene Volokh
” (The case was Medtronic, Inc. v. [read post]
15 Sep 2008, 7:46 pm
While this case makes three plaintiff's verdicts and two defense verdicts so far this year in Marshall patent cases, recall that one of those wins, Medtronic's $250 million against Boston Scientific has been cut by more than 90% (from $250 million to $19) post-verdict, so giving the plaintiff credit for a 10% win, that has plaintiffs winning only 44% of the patent cases going to trial in Marshall this year. [read post]
30 Aug 2007, 4:02 am
District Court for the Central District of California (no reasoning provided within the opinion)Boston Scientific Scimed (formerly known as Scimed Life Systems) v. [read post]