Legal Opinion
Mallinckrodt, Inc. v. Medipart, Inc., and Jerry A. Alexander
Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
Decided September 24, 1992No. 90-1138, 90-1272PublishedCited by 113 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
PAULINE NEWMAN, Circuit Judge.
This action for patent infringement and inducement to infringe relates to the use of a patented medical device in violation of a “single use only” notice that accompanied the sale of the device. Mallinckrodt sold its patented device to hospitals, which after initial use of the devices sent them to Medi-part for servicing that enabled the hospitals to use the device again. Mallinckrodt claimed that Medipart thus induced infringement by the hospitals and itself infringed the patent.
The district court held that violation of the “single use only” notice can not be…
2Cases cited43 opinions
- Cohens v. VirginiaSupreme Court of the United States · 1821
- Continental T. v. Inc. v. GTE Sylvania Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1977
- Dr. Miles Medical Co. v. John D. Park & Sons Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1911
- United States v. Arnold, Schwinn & Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1967
- Business Electronics Corp. v. Sharp Electronics Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1988
38 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by113 opinions
- C.R. Bard, Inc. v. M3 Systems, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1998
- B. Braun Medical, Inc. v. Abbott Laboratories and Np Medical, Inc., Defendants/cross-AppellantsCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1997
- Zenith Electronics Corporation, and Elo Touchsystems, Inc. v. Exzec, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1999
- Virginia Panel Corporation, Plaintiff/cross-Appellant v. Mac Panel CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1998
- Globetrotter Software, Inc. v. Elan Computer Group, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2004
108 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.