Legal Opinion
AngioDynamics, Inc. v. Biolitec AG
District Court, D. Massachusetts
Decided April 11, 2013No. C.A. No. 09-cv-30181-MAPPublishedCited by 10 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER REGARDING PLAINTIFF’S EMERGENCY MOTION FOR CONTEMPT (Dkt. No. 205)
PONSOR, District Judge.
I. INTRODUCTION
This case originally arose out of a private commercial dispute between the par*210ties. Over the last month, however, the case has turned into a challenge to the very foundation of the rule of law. Defendants Wolfgang Neuberger, Biolitec AG (“BAG”), and Biomed Technology Holdings, Ltd. (“Biomed”) flagrantly and intentionally violated a preliminary injunction issued by this court.1 Plaintiff brought this motion for civil contempt in response to Defendants’ notice to the…
2Cases cited27 opinions
- Liteky v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1994
- United States v. United Mine Workers of AmericaSupreme Court of the United States · 1947
- Roadway Express, Inc. v. PiperSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
- Gompers v. Bucks Stove & Range Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1911
- Shillitani v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
22 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- AngioDynamics, Inc. v. Biolitec AGCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 2015
- AngioDynamics, Inc. v. Biolitec AGCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 2015
- AngioDynamics, Inc. v. Biolitec AGCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 2016
- AngioDynamics, Inc. v. Biolitec AGDistrict Court, D. Massachusetts · 2014
- AngioDynamics, Inc. v. Biolitec, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2015
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.