Legal Opinion
Arthrocare Corp. v. Smith & Nephew, Inc.
District Court, D. Delaware
Decided March 10, 2004No. CIV.01-504-SLRPublishedCited by 10 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM OPINION
SUE L. ROBINSON, Chief Judge.
I. INTRODUCTION
On July 25, 2001, plaintiff Arthrocare Corporation (“Arthrocare”) filed this action against defendant Smith & Nephew, Inc. (“Smith & Nephew”) alleging willful direct, contributory, and inducing infringement of certain claims of U.S. Patent Nos. 5,697,536 (the “’536 patent”), 5,697,882 (the “ ’882 patent”) and 6,224,592 (the “ ’592 patent”). (D.I.l) Smith & Nephew answered the complaint on September 13, 2001 denying the infringement allegations and asserting five affirmative defenses including noninfringement, invalidity, misuse,…
2Cases cited60 opinions
- MARKMAN Et Al. v. WESTVIEW INSTRUMENTS, INC., Et Al.Supreme Court of the United States · 1996
- Herbert Markman and Positek, Inc. v. Westview Instruments, Inc. And Althon Enterprises, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1995
- Cybor Corporation v. Fas Technologies, Inc., and Fastar Ltd., Defendants-CrossCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1998
- Allied Chemical Corp. v. Daiflon, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1980
- Precision Instrument Manufacturing Co. v. Automotive Maintenance MacHinery Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1945
55 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- Arthrocare Corp. v. Smith & Nephew, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2005
- Honeywell International, Inc. v. Universal Avionics Systems Corp.District Court, D. Delaware · 2005
- Raynor v. G4S Secure Solutions (USA) Inc.District Court, W.D. North Carolina · 2018
- Mosaid Technologies Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co.District Court, D. New Jersey · 2005
- Kothmann Enterprises, Inc. v. Trinity Industries, Inc.District Court, S.D. Texas · 2006
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.