Legal Opinion
Barry v. Medtronic, Inc.
District Court, E.D. Texas
Decided March 24, 2017No. CIVIL ACTION No. 1:14-cv-104PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS REGARDING INEQUITABLE CONDUCT
Ron Clark, United States District Judge
Plaintiff Dr. Mark A. Barry brought suit, asserting that Defendant Medtronic, Inc. indirectly infringed two patents,1 U.S. Patent No. 7,670,358 (“the ’358 Patent”) and U.S. Patent No. 8,361,121 (“the ’121 Patent”), which relate to a system and method of aligning spinal vertebrae to correct common spinal deformities like scoliosis. The issues of infringement, invalidity, willfulness, and damages were tried to a jury. The jury found that Medtronic indirectly infringed each of the asserted claims of the…
2Cases cited28 opinions
- Precision Instrument Manufacturing Co. v. Automotive Maintenance MacHinery Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1945
- Hazel-Atlas Glass Co. v. Hartford-Empire Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1944
- Kingsdown Medical Consultants, Ltd. And E.R. Squibb & Sons, Inc. v. Hollister IncorporatedCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1988
- Keystone Driller Co. v. General Excavator Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1933
- Therasense, Inc. v. Becton, Dickinson and Co.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2011
23 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Barry v. Medtronic, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2019
- Skedco, Inc. v. Strategic Operations, Inc.District Court, D. Oregon · 2018
- FINE AGROCHEMICALS LTD v. STOLLER ENTERPRISES INCDistrict Court, S.D. Texas · 2023