|
 |
 Printable Version
Email This Page
|
|
|
|
 |
|
| |
 Federal Courts of Appeal
 District Court
Representative Interferences
Representative I.T.C. Cases
Patent Office Cases
Foreign Proceedings
Other Decisions/Proceedings
|
|
|
| |
District Court |
|
|
| |
 | Morgan & Finnegan Obtains Summary Judgments For Heidelberger Druckmaschinen AG (District Court of New Hampshire, 2007)
Related Attorneys:
John F. Sweeney,
Seth J. Atlas,
Steven F. Meyer,
Steven M. Purdy,
Sean E. Jackson
|
| Chief Judge Rules For Morgan & Finnegan Client Heidelberger Druckmaschinen AG (District Court of New Hampshire, 2006)
| | Morgan & Finnegan Obtains Summary Judgments For Heidelberger Druckmaschinen AG
Related Attorneys:
John F. Sweeney,
Seth J. Atlas,
Steven F. Meyer,
Steven M. Purdy,
Sean E. Jackson
|
| Morgan & Finnegan Victorious in Dismissing Clayton Act Antitrust Claims Against Client Heidelberger Druckmaschinen AG (District Court of New Hampshire, 2005)
Related Attorney:
John F. Sweeney
|
| In Re: Rembrandt Technologies, LP Patent Litigation,MDL Docket No. 07-md-1848 (GMS), Digital TV;
| | Rembrandt Technologies, LP v. CBS Corp., C.A. No. 1:06-727-GMS (D. Del.), Digital TV;
| | Rembrandt Technologies, LP v. NBC Universal, Inc., C.A. No. 1:06-729-GMS (D. Del.), Digital TV;
| | Rembrandt Technologies, LP v. ABC, Inc., C.A. No. 1:06-730-GMS (D. Del.), Digital TV;
| | Rembrandt Technologies, LP v. Fox Entertainment Group, Inc., et al., C.A. No. 1:06-731-GMS (D. Del.), Digital TV;
| | Edwards Life Sciences LLC and Endogad Research PTY Limited,
| | Medtronic, Inc., Medtronic USA, Inc. and Medtronic Vascular, Inc. v. W.L. Gore & Associates, Inc., C 06-04455 JSW (N.D. CA.), Stent Grafts
| | Morgan & Finnegan Client Receives Summary Judgment
Related Attorneys:
John F. Sweeney,
,
|
| Chief Judge Rules For Morgan & Finnegan Client Heidelberger Druckmaschinen AG
Related Attorneys:
John F. Sweeney,
,
Steven F. Meyer
|
| Recently, Morgan & Finnegan’s client Medinol, Ltd. obtained two favorable summary judgment decisions in a patent infringement action involving Medinol’s patents on stents. Stents are tiny medical devices that are inserted in the body to open up diseased
Related Attorneys:
Richard C. Komson,
Sean E. Jackson
|
| Medtronic Vascular, Inc. v. Boston Sci. Corp., 2005 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 1157 (D. Del., Jan. 5, 2005)
| | Empresa Cubana Del Tabaco v. Culbro Corp., 399 F.3d 462, (2d Cir. 2005)
| | First Franklin Financial Corp. v. Franklin First Financial, Ltd., 356 F.Supp.2d 1048 (N.D.Cal. 2005)
| | Medinol Ltd. v. Guidant Corp., 341 F.Supp. 2d 301 (S.D.N.Y. 2004); Patent interpreted by Medinol Ltd. v. Guidant Corp., 2004 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 19705 (S.D.N.Y., Sept. 30, 2004)
| | Rolex Watch U.S.A., Inc. v. Zeotec Diamonds, Inc., 2003 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 5595 (C.D. Cal., Mar. 7, 2003)
| | Pieczenik v. Dyax Corp., 76 Fed. Appx. 293 (Fed. Cir. 2003)
| | Rolex Watch U.S.A., Inc. v. JBJ Distributors, Inc., No. H-99-1621 (S.D.Tex. Aug. 20, 2001) (Final Judgment)
| | Rolex Watch U.S.A., Inc. v. JBJ Distributors, Inc., No. H-99-1621 (S.D.Tex. Aug. 20, 2001) (Order)
| | Valeo Elec. Svs., Inc. v Siemens Automotive Corp. (E.D. Mich. 2001)
| | TM Patents L.L.P. v. IBM. Corp., 136 F. Supp. 2d 209 (S.D.N.Y. 2001)
| | Kollmorgen Corp. v. Yaskawa Elec. Corp., 147 F.Supp.2d 464 (W.D.Va. 2001)
| | TM Patents L.L.P. v. IBM. Corp., 121 F.Supp. 2d 349, (S.D.N.Y. 2000)
| | Data Gen. Corp. v. IBM Corp., 93 F. Supp. 2d 89 (D. Mass. 2000)
| | Symbol Technologies, Inc. v. Bell Data Software Corp. (E.D. Mich. 2000)
| | TM Patents L.L.P. v. IBM. Corp., 72 F.Supp. 2d 370, (S.D.N.Y. 1999)
| | Hoffman-La Roche Inc. v. Genpharm Inc., 50 F.Supp.2d 367 (D.N.J. 1999)
| | HCC, Inc. v. R H & M Mach. Co., 39 F.Supp.2d 317 (S.D.N.Y. 1999)
| | Kollmorgen Corp. v. Yaskawa Elec. Corp., 169 F.Supp.2d 530 (W.D.Va. 1999)
| | Global Mail Ltd. v. U.S. Postal Service, 142 F.3d 208, (4th Cir. 1998)
| | W.L. Gore & Associates v. Jacobs. Civil Action, No. 97 Civ. 9355 (SAS) (S.D.N.Y. 1997)
| | Colgate Palmolive Co. v. W.L. Gore & Associates, Inc., 919 F.Supp. 767 (D.N.J. 1996)
| | Arrow Fastener Co., Inc. v. The Stanley Works; 59 F.3d 384 (2nd Cir. 1995)
| | Komark, Inc. v. Pathmark Stores, Inc., Civil Action 95 Civ. 2165 (CSH) (S.D.N.Y. 1995)
| | Duracraft Corp. v. Honeywell, Inc., 881 F. Supp. 685 (D. Mass. 1994)
| | Comedy Partners v. Jackie Mason, 93 Civ-7513 (JSM (S.D.N.Y. 1993)
| | Reckitt & Colman (Overseas) Ltd. v. Super-Discount Beauty Supply of Jamaica Corp., Civil Action No. CV93-2140 (CPS) (E.D.N.Y. 1993)
| | Cordis Corp. v. C.R. Bard, Inc., 30 U.S.P.Q.2d 1664 (S.D. TX. 1993)
| | Advanced Cardiovascular Systems, Inc. v. C.R. Bard, inc., 144 F.R.D. 372 (N.D. Cal. 1992)
| | Pfizer v. C.R. Bard (D. Mass. 1992)
| | Mobil Oil Corp. v. Amoco Chemicals Corp., 779 F.Supp. 1429 (D.Del. 1991)
| | Union Oil Co. of California v. Chevron U.S.A., Inc., 34 F.Supp.2d 1222 (C.D.Cal. 1998)
| | Airwick Industries Inc. v. Sterling Drug Inc., 720 F.Supp. 409 (D.N.J. 1989)
| | Metropolitan Broadcasting Corp. v. GAF Broadcasting, Inc., Civil Action No. 88-CV 4976 (JES) (S.D.N.Y. 1988)
| | Supermarkets General Corp. (Pathmark Stores) v. Pathmark Title Co., 686 F.Supp. 535 (D.MD. 1987)
| | Procter & Gamble Co. v. Nabisco Brands, Inc., 604 F. Supp. 1485 (D. Del. 1985)
| | Hukafit Sportswear Inc. v. Banff Ltd. Inc. (S.D.N.Y. 1985)
| | Procter & Gamble Co. v. Weyerhaeuser Co., (N.D. ILL. 1985)
| | Brenner v. Recognition Equipment, Inc., 593 F. Supp. 1275 (S.D.N.Y. 1984)
| | Plus Products v. Natural Organics, Inc., 1984 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 19801 (S.D.N.Y., Feb. 3, 1984)
| | Slater Electric, Inc. v. Nelco Corp., 1983 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 18988 (E.D.N.Y. 1983)
| | Lambda Electronics Corporation v. Lambda Technology, Inc. 515 Supp. 915 (S.D.N.Y 1981)
| | Boehringer Ingelheim v. Pharmadyne Laboratories 532 F.Supp. 1040 (D.N.J. 1980)
| | Transamerica Corp. v. Transfer Planning, Inc. 419 F.Supp. 1261 (S.D.N.Y. 1976)
| | Grotrian, Helfferich, Schula, TH. Steinweg NACH. v. Steinway & Sons 365 F. Supp. 707 (S.D.N.Y 1973)
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Contacts · Site Map · Help · Languages · Legal
Copyright © 2008 Morgan & Finnegan, LLP |
 |
|
