Smith & Nephew Incorporated et al v. Arthrex, Incorporated
Case Number: 3:2004cv00029
Filed: January 12, 2004
Court: US District Court for the District of Oregon
Office: Portland (3) Office
Presiding Judge: Michael W. Mosman
Nature of Suit: Patent
Cause of Action: 35 U.S.C. ยง 145 Civil Action to Obtain Patent
Jury Demanded By: Both

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed Document Text
September 12, 2013 Opinion or Order Filing 1113 Statement of Reasons Supporting Permanent Injunction. Signed on 9/12/13 by Judge Michael W. Mosman. (dls)
August 31, 2010 Opinion or Order Filing 739 OPINION AND ORDER: For the foregoing reasons, I DENY both parties' cross-motions for summary judgment. (Def.'s Mot. for Summ. J. (#707); Pls.' Mot. for Summ. J. (#711).) Consistent with my earlier order (#692), I will permit the parties to undergo additional expert discovery in light of thealtered claim construction. The parties must provide initial expert reports and disclosures by November 15, 2010. Rebuttal expert reports are due January 10, 2011, in light of the holida y. These rebuttal reports must not include new testing, but may include precise duplication of opposing experiments ortests. The expert deposition deadline will follow, set for March 11, 2011. The parties must also exchange all data created in any ex periment with the submission of the applicable report, and must permit inspection of test materials, samples, setup, and equipment within 14 days of submission of any report that includes experiments. The parties are requested to confer andsubmit proposed trial dates to the Court no later than December 1, 2010. Signed on 8/31/2010 by Judge Michael W. Mosman, 707 , 711 . (dls)
April 7, 2010 Opinion or Order Filing 692 Opinion And Order. Signed on 4/7/10 by Judge Michael W. Mosman. (cib)
Access additional case information on PACER

Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.

Access this case on the Oregon District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Smith & Nephew Incorporated et al v. Arthrex, Incorporated
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?