Legal Opinion
Intermedics, Inc. v. Ventritex, Inc.
District Court, N.D. California
Decided September 13, 1991No. C 90 20233 JW (WDB)PublishedCited by 32 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
ORDER AND OPINION RE MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT CONCERNING DEFENDANTS’ ENTITLEMENT TO 271(e)(1) DEFENSE
WAYNE D. BRAZIL, United States Magistrate Judge.
Plaintiff’s second amended complaint alleges that defendants are liable for patent infringement, misappropriation of trade secrets, and a variety of other unfair business practices in connection with defendants’ development of the Cadence, an implantable defibrillator.
Both, parties have filed motions 1 concerning defendants’ entitlement to assert the affirmative defense provided for at 35 U.S.C. § 271(e)(1). Having considered the parties’…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Henry G. Mack v. South Bay Beer Distributors, Inc., Dba Bay Beer Distributors, a California CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1986
- Eli Lilly & Co. v. Medtronic, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1990
- Roche Products, Inc. v. Bolar Pharmaceutical Co., Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1984
- Knapp-Monarch Co. v. Casco Products Corp. And E.A. Langenfeld Associates, Ltd.Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1965
- Union Asbestos & Rubber Company, by Change of Name Unarco Industries, Inc. v. Evans Products CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1964
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by32 opinions
- Merck KGaA v. Integra Lifesciences I, Ltd.Supreme Court of the United States · 2005
- Telectronics Pacing Systems, Inc. v. Ventritex, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1992
- QR Spex, Inc. v. Motorola, Inc.District Court, E.D. Texas · 2007
- Integra LifeSciences I, Ltd. v. Merck KGaACourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2003
- Medical Solutions, Inc. v. C CHANGE SURGICAL LLCCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2008
27 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.