Legal Opinion
American Optical Corp. v. Medtronic, Inc.
District Court, D. Massachusetts
Decided September 14, 1972No. Civ. A. Nos. 71-11, 71-2010PublishedCited by 30 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
CAMPBELL, District Judge.
The question for decision is whether Medtronic is to be forced to produce documents written by its patent counsel, for which it claims either an attorney-client privilege, a work product privilege, or both.
I
A. The Factual and Procedural Background
Medtronic, a Minnesota corporation, is the leading manufacturer of cardiac pacemakers. American Optical (AO), a Delaware corporation principally doing business in Massachusetts, owns the two patents involved in this litigation, Patent 3,345,990 (the ’990 patent), and Patent 3,528,428 (the ’428 patent). The…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Hickman v. TaylorSupreme Court of the United States · 1947
- Natta v. HoganCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1968
- Stix Products, Inc. v. United Merchants & Manufacturers, Inc.District Court, S.D. New York · 1969
- Green v. CrapoMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1902
- International Business Machines Corp. v. Sperry Rand Corp.District Court, D. Delaware · 1968
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by30 opinions
- United States v. Monroe Adlman, as Officer and Representative of Sequa CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1998
- Duplan Corporation v. Deering Milliken, Inc.District Court, D. South Carolina · 1974
- Burlington Industries v. Exxon Corp.District Court, D. Maryland · 1974
- SCM Corp. v. Xerox Corp.District Court, D. Connecticut · 1976
- United States v. American Telephone & Telegraph Co.District Court, District of Columbia · 1979
25 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.