Oxford Gene Technology Ltd. v. Mergen Ltd.
District Court, D. Delaware
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
- Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd. v. Zenith Radio CorporationSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Reeves v. Sanderson Plumbing Products, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 2000
- Graham v. John Deere Co. of Kansas CitySupreme Court of the United States · 1966
- 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
- Abbott Laboratories v. Sandoz, Inc.District Court, N.D. Illinois · 2010
- Zimmer Technology, Inc. v. Howmedica Osteonics Corp.District Court, N.D. Indiana · 2006