Legal Opinion
Hilyard v. Medtronic, Inc.
District Court, E.D. Missouri
Decided May 8, 2014No. Case No. 4:13-CV-2059 CEJPublishedCited by 6 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
CAROL E. JACKSON, District Judge.
This matter is before the Court on plaintiffs motion to remand this action to the Circuit Court of the City of St. Louis, from which it was removed. Defendants oppose the motion, and the issues are fully briefed.
I. Background
Defendants Medtronic, Inc. and Med-tronic Sofamor Danek USA, Inc. (collectively “Medtronic”), design, manufacture, and sell various types of medical devices, including the InFUSE 0 Bone Graft and LT-CAGE 0 Lumbar Tapered Fusion De*1015vice (Infuse).1 Infuse is a Class III medical device approved by the Food and Drug…
2Cases cited18 opinions
- Caterpillar Inc. v. WilliamsSupreme Court of the United States · 1987
- Gunn v. MintonSupreme Court of the United States · 2013
- Medtronic, Inc. v. LohrSupreme Court of the United States · 1996
- Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals Inc. v. Thompson Ex Rel. ThompsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Gully v. First Nat. Bank in MeridianSupreme Court of the United States · 1936
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Barone v. Bausch & Lomb, Inc.District Court, W.D. New York · 2019
- Carmine v. PoffenbargerDistrict Court, E.D. Virginia · 2015
- Middendorf v. West Chester Hospital, LLCDistrict Court, S.D. Ohio · 2017
- McCann v. West Chester Hospital, LLCDistrict Court, S.D. Ohio · 2017
- (PC) Sims v. PerezDistrict Court, E.D. California · 2022
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.