Legal Opinion
Medinol Ltd. v. Guidant Corp.
District Court, S.D. New York
Decided June 4, 2004No. 03 Civ. 2604(SAS)PublishedCited by 11 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION AND ORDER
SCHEINDLIN, District Judge.
Medinol Ltd. (“Medinol”) brings this action for damages and declaratory and permanent injunctive relief relating to the alleged infringement by Guidant Corp. (“Guidant”) and its subsidiary Advanced Cardiovascular Systems, Inc. (“ACS”) (collectively “defendants”) of certain of Medi- nol’s patents. 1 Guidant now moves for summary judgement on the basis of collateral estoppel, arguing that Medinol’s prior litigation over three of its patents— the ’303, ’120, and ’018 — in the Cordis case 2 precludes Medinol from asserting claims associated with…
2Cases cited33 opinions
- Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd. v. Zenith Radio CorporationSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Adickes v. S. H. Kress & Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1970
- Allen v. McCurrySupreme Court of the United States · 1980
- Graham v. John Deere Co. of Kansas CitySupreme Court of the United States · 1966
28 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by11 opinions
- Katz v. American Airlines, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2011
- Medinol Ltd. v. Guidant Corp.District Court, S.D. New York · 2005
- Kreinik v. Showbran Photo, Inc.District Court, S.D. New York · 2005
- Orenshteyn v. International Business Machines, Corp.District Court, S.D. New York · 2013
- MARCTEC, LLC v. Johnson & JohnsonDistrict Court, S.D. Illinois · 2009
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.