• Home
  • Archives
  • Contact
Sun, May 22, 2022

Venable Fitzpatrick's Legal Updates / Medical Devices

Legal Updates/
Medical Devices

SORT BY:
OR
Home Venue 9th Circuit

Recent Posts

9th Circuit, Court Cases Filed

Complaint filed by Illumina, Inc. against Natera, Inc.

On March 16, 2018, Illumina, Inc. (“Plaintiff”) filed a complaint against Natera, Inc. (“Defendant”) asserting infringement of U.S. Patent No….

March 16, 2018
9th Circuit, Court Decisions

Magistrate Judge Corley Denies-in-Part Stryker’s Motion to Seal Sanctions Motion in Dispute with Karl Storz Endoscopy

February 1, 2018 – In its ongoing dispute with Karl-Storz Endoscopy-America, Inc. in 3: 14-cv-00876 (N.D. Cal.), United States Magistrate…

February 1, 2018
9th Circuit, Court Decisions

Court Denied Parties’ Motion to Extend Discovery Deadlines

January 29, 2018 – On January 26, 2018, the court denied the parties’ stipulated motion to extend discovery deadlines and…

January 29, 2018
9th Circuit, Court Cases Filed

10X Genomics files an Infringement Complaint against Bio-Rad Laboratories

January 10, 2018 – 10X Genomics, Inc. filed an infringement complaint against Bio-Rad Laboratories, Inc. on January 9, 2018. 10X…

January 10, 2018
9th Circuit, Court Cases Filed

US District Court for the Northern District of California – Complaint filed by Iridex Corporation against Quantel Medical et al.

On January 8, 2018, Iridex Corporation (“Plaintiff”) filed a complaint against Quantel Medical, S.A., Quantel USA, Inc., and Quantel, S.A….

January 8, 2018
9th Circuit, Court Decisions

Court Granted in Part and Denied in Part Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss Over Unpatentable Subject Matter, Abstract Ideas, and Lack of Inventive Concept

December 21, 2017 – On December 19, 2017, the court granted in part Defendant QuantifiCare Inc.’s motion to dismiss because…

December 21, 2017
9th Circuit, Court Decisions

Court Denies to Lift a Stay Pending Inter Partes Review

December 5, 2017 – On December 1, 2017, the court denied Plaintiffs Boston Scientific Corporation’s and Boston Scientific Scimed, Inc.’s…

December 5, 2017
9th Circuit, Court Cases Filed

Complaint filed by Endobotics, Inc. against Fortimedix Surgical, et al.

On December 1, 2017, Endobiotics, Inc. (“Plaintiff”) filed a complaint against Fortimedix Surgical B.V. and Fortimedix USA, Inc. (“Defendants”) asserting…

December 1, 2017
9th Circuit, Court Decisions

AngioScore and TriReme Medical Settle Patent Suit Over Heart Catheters

November 20, 2017 – AngioScore, Inc. and TriReme Medical LLC settled their patent infringement action over angioplasty balloon catheter technology,…

November 20, 2017
9th Circuit, Court Decisions

Court Denied Plaintiff’s Motion for Discovery Sanctions

November 16, 2017 – On November 13, 2017, the court denied Plaintiff Karl Storz Endoscopy-America’s motion for discovery sanctions after…

November 16, 2017
Load More

Popular Posts

  • IPR / PGR / CBM Medical Device Updates in February 2021
  • IPR / PGR / CBM Medical Device Updates in January 2021
  • IPR / PGR / CBM Medical Device Updates in December 2020
  • IPR / PGR / CBM Medical Device Updates in November 2020
  • IPR / PGR / CBM Medical Device Updates in October 2020

Connect With Us

ATTORNEY ADVERTISING

® /TM / © Venable LLP 2022. All Rights Reserved.

The individuals who maintain this site work for Venable LLP. The information, comments and links posted on this site do not constitute legal advice. No attorney-client relationship has been or will be formed by any communication(s) to, from or with the site and/or the author. For legal advice, contact an attorney at Venable LLP or an attorney actively practicing in your jurisdiction. Do not send any confidential or privileged information to the author; neither Venable LLP nor the author will assume any liability or responsibility for it. If you send any information, documents or materials to the site, you give permission for the author to include them on or in the site. No information, documents or materials you send to the site will be considered confidential or privileged by Venable LLP or its lawyers. Also, no such information, documents or materials will be returned to you. All decisions relating to the content belong to the author.