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

E.D. Tex.

Medtronic Vascular Inc et al v. Boston Scientific Corporation et al, No. 2:09-cv-00028 (E.D. Tex. Feb. 2, 2009)

Granted in Part
Court
U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Marshall Division
Case No.
No. 2:09-cv-00028, Dkt. No. 283
Decided
February 2, 2009
Judge
T. John Ward, J.
Document
Memorandum Opinion and Order
Docket Entry
MEMORANDUM OPINION and ORDER severing pltf's continuing causes of action for future royalties. Severed from case 2:06cv78
Length
4 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 is plaintiffs Medtroni c Vascular, Inc.’s, Medtronic USA, Inc.’s, Medtronic, Inc.’s, and Medtroni c Vascular Galway, Ltd.’s (co llectively, “Medtronic”) Motion for Severance of Claims for Post-Verdict Ro yalties to Allow for En try of Final Judgment (Docket Entry #277). In this motion, Medtroni c requests the Court to sever Medtronic’s continuing causes of action for post-verdict infringement of U.S. Patent No. 6,210,364 (“the ‘364 Patent”) into a separate case, allowing the Cour t to enter final judgment.