Legal Opinion

Johnson & Johnson Orthopaedics, Inc. v. Minnesota Mining & Manufacturing Co.

District Court, D. Delaware

Decided July 13, 1989No. Civ. A. 89-247-JJFPublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

FARNAN, District Judge.

This case is presently before the Court on defendant Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Company’s (“3M”) motion for a temporary restraining order (“TRO”). Because the Court concludes that 3M has failed to establish irreparable injury, the Court will deny 3M’s motion.

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

Plaintiff Johnson & Johnson Orthopaed-ics, Inc. (“J & J”) is the owner of all right and title to U.S. Patent No. 4,433,680 (“the ’680 patent”), which relates to an improved polyurethane orthopaedic casting bandage used to form orthopaedic casts. Of particular relevance…

2Cases cited8 opinions

Hybritech Incorporated v. Abbott LaboratoriesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1988
Frank's Gmc Truck Center, Inc. v. General Motors CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1988
Coca-Cola Bottling of Elizabethtown v. Coca-Cola Co.District Court, D. Delaware · 1987
Cordis Corporation v. Medtronic, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1987
Tootsie Roll Industries, Inc. v. Sathers, Inc.District Court, D. Delaware · 1987

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by2 opinions

Symbol Technologies, Inc. v. Janam Technologies LLCDistrict Court, D. Delaware · 2010
Guangzhou Komaspec Mechanical and Electrical Products Manufacturing Co. Ltd. v. Bootysprout Ventures, LLCDistrict Court, D. Delaware · 2024