NICOLO v. PATTERSON BELKNAP WEBB & TYLER, LLP et al
Plaintiff: DR. ENRICO NICOLO
Defendant: PATTERSON BELKNAP WEBB & TYLER, LLP, ETHICON ENDO-SURGERY, INC. and KEVIN N. MALEK
Case Number: 2:2013cv00706
Filed: May 21, 2013
Court: US District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania
Office: Pittsburgh Office
County: Allegheny
Presiding Judge: David S. Cercone
Nature of Suit: Patent
Cause of Action: 28 U.S.C. ยง 1332 Diversity-Petition for Removal
Jury Demanded By: None

Available Case Documents

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

Date Filed Document Text
September 30, 2016 Opinion or Order Filing 108 OPINION resolving 65 and 91 defendants' motions for summary judgment. Signed by Judge David S. Cercone on 9/30/16. (mwm)
March 19, 2015 Opinion or Order Filing 83 MEMORANDUM ORDER granting in part and denying in part 48 Plaintiff's Motion to Quash. The motion is granted to the extent it seeks to preclude inquiry into conversations plaintiff's counsel had with Kevin Malek prior to the commencement o f this action regarding the events giving rise to the lawsuit and/or any potential for a pre-suit compromise. The motion likewise is granted to the extent defendants seek to question plaintiff's counsel in his capacity as a direct competitor of plaintiff and/or about being or becoming a direct competitor of plaintiff (and the authorizations for or sources of the information used in becoming such a competitor). The motion is denied in all other aspects; and FURTHER ORDERING that plaintiff&# 039;s counsel comply with and submit to deposition with regard to the permitted areas of inquiry in the subpoena duces tecum served on March 31, 2014, at a date and time mutually agreeable to counsel within the extension of discovery authorized in conjunction with plaintiff's motion to extend. All as more fully set forth in the Memorandum Order. Signed by Judge David S. Cercone on 3/19/15. (mwm)
March 26, 2014 Opinion or Order Filing 44 OPINION resolving 19 , 21 defendants' motions to dismiss. Signed by Judge David S. Cercone on 3/26/14. (mwm)
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 Pennsylvania Western District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: NICOLO v. PATTERSON BELKNAP WEBB & TYLER, LLP et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: DR. ENRICO NICOLO
Represented By: Blynn L. Shideler
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: PATTERSON BELKNAP WEBB & TYLER, LLP
Represented By: Gregory J. Norton
Represented By: James R. Schadel
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: ETHICON ENDO-SURGERY, INC.
Represented By: Nicole Foley
Represented By: Harold P. Weinberger
Represented By: C. James Zeszutek
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: KEVIN N. MALEK
Represented By: David A. Strassburger
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | 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?