Patent Case Watch

Patent opinions from the Eastern District of Texas and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

E.D. Tex.

Saffran, M.D., Ph.D., v. Johnson & Johnson et al, No. 2:07-cv-00451 (E.D. Tex. Jan. 20, 2011)

Granted in Part
Daubert / Expert Challenges Claim Construction Damages
Court
U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Marshall Division
Case No.
No. 2:07-cv-00451, Dkt. No. 277
Decided
January 20, 2011
Judge
See opinion
Document
Memorandum Opinion and Order
Docket Entry
MEMORANDUM OPINION and ORDER - Defendants motion that Dr. Freemans untested speculation about Cordiss experiments be inadmissible is DENIED as moot. Defendants Daubert Motion No. 2 is DENIED #183. Plaintiffs Motion to Exclude Portions of th…
Length
13 pages

From the Opinion

The passage below is extracted verbatim from the opening of the document. It has not been editorially summarized — consult the full opinion for the court's complete reasoning.

Before the Court are various Daubert Motions filed by both parties. (Dkt. Nos. 182, 183, 193, 194, and 195.) The Court has carefully considered the parties‟ submissions, the record, and the applicable la w. The following Memorandum Opinion and Order sets forth the Court‟s rulings. I. BACKGROUND Plaintiff Bruce N. Saffran, M.D., Ph.D. has brought the abovestyled patent infringement lawsuit against Defendants Johnson & Johnson (“J&J”) and Cordis Corporation (“ Cordis”) (collectively “Defendants”). Saffran asserts U.S. Patent No.

Download Opinion (PDF)

Source: govinfo.gov USCOURTS collection · retrieved July 23, 2026 · Report an error

Other documents in this case