Search for: "Medtronic, Inc. v. Lohr" Results 1 - 20 of 104
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
23 May 2007, 1:09 pm
PMA is in no way comparable to the less rigorous form of marketing clearance at issue in Medtronic, Inc. v. [read post]
28 Sep 2011, 1:04 pm by Bexis
We don't see many successful applications of preemption with respect to 510k, Class II medical devices since Medtronic, Inc. v. [read post]
26 Jan 2012, 1:07 pm by Bexis
That’s because it originated in a complaint’s vague language that Medtronic, Inc. v. [read post]
25 Jan 2016, 1:44 pm
  Buckman then distinguished the “parallel claim” concept enunciated in Medtronic, Inc. v. [read post]
20 Jan 2012, 8:41 am by Bexis
Because it applied implied preemption, the decision in PLIVA, Inc. v. [read post]
27 Oct 2010, 1:37 pm by Bexis
We wish.Our side lost that issue in Medtronic, Inc. v. [read post]
22 Feb 2008, 1:22 pm
” Distinguishing the 1996 case of Medtronic v. [read post]
24 Apr 2015, 1:00 pm
Medtronic, Inc., ___ F.3d ___, 2015 WL 1786742, at *9 (10th Cir. [read post]
19 Mar 2008, 6:04 am
Lohr, 518 U.S. 470 (1996), the FDA opposed preemption, and the Court found no preemption.And in both Buckman v. [read post]