Legal Opinion

Oxford Gene Technology Ltd. v. Mergen Ltd.

District Court, D. Delaware

Decided November 19, 2004No. CIV.A.C2-1695-KAJPublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

MEMORANDUM OPINION

JORDAN, District Judge.

I. INTRODUCTION

This is a patent infringement case. Presently before me are several motions filed by plaintiff, Oxford Gene Technology Limited (“OGT”), and defendant, Mergen Limited (“Mergen”). Those filed by OGT include a Motion for Partial Summary Judgment of Patent Validity and Enablement (Docket Item [“D.I.”] 177; the “Motion for Validity”), a Motion for Partial Summary Judgment of Infringement (D.I. 179; the “Motion for Infringement”), and a Motion to Strike Mergen’s Newly Identified Non-Enablement Defense (D.I. 202; the “Motion to Strike”). Those…

2Cases cited47 opinions

  1. Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1986
  2. Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd. v. Zenith Radio CorporationSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
  3. Reeves v. Sanderson Plumbing Products, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 2000
  4. Graham v. John Deere Co. of Kansas CitySupreme Court of the United States · 1966
  5. MARKMAN Et Al. v. WESTVIEW INSTRUMENTS, INC., Et Al.Supreme Court of the United States · 1996

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

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Abbott Laboratories v. Sandoz, Inc.District Court, N.D. Illinois · 2010
  2. Zimmer Technology, Inc. v. Howmedica Osteonics Corp.District Court, N.D. Indiana · 2006

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API