![]() Surgical") is a Delaware corporation with its principal place of business in Norwalk, Connecticut. Defendant United States Surgical Corporation ("U.S. Ethicon develops, manufactures and sells mechanical wound-management products.Ģ. Both the general partners are subsidiaries of Johnson & Johnson, Inc. Plaintiff Ethicon Endo-Surgery ("Ethicon") is a general partnership formed under the laws of the State of New Jersey with its principal place of business in Cincinnati, Ohio. 52, we set forth our findings of fact and conclusions of law.ġ. The Defendant denies that its product infringes the Plaintiff's patent, and further argues that the balance of equities weighs against the issuance of a preliminary injunction. *1504 This device prevents a surgeon from inadvertently cutting tissue without having the cutter loaded with staples. The patent in question covers a lockout device. Surgical, infringe one of the Plaintiff's patents. ![]() ![]() In particular the Plaintiff, Ethicon, asserts that the linear cutter-staplers which are marketed by the Defendant, U.S. These instrument are used by surgeons to simultaneously cut and staple tissue. This is a dispute concerning surgical linear cutter-staplers. In weighing the testimony of the witnesses, we considered each witness' relationship to the Plaintiff or to the Defendant their interest, if any, in the outcome of the trial their manner of testifying their opportunity to observe or acquire knowledge concerning facts about which they testified and the extent to which they were supported or contradicted by other credible evidence. 27, 38), and joint proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law (doc. 24, 37), and the Defendant's proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law (doc. In rendering our decision of this matter, we have considered the testimony of the witnesses, the documents admitted into evidence, the Plaintiff's proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law (doc. Final arguments were heard on April 4, 1994. On March 21 and 22, 1994, the Court held a Hearing on the Plaintiff's motion. 15 & 22) and the Defendant has provided a Surreply Response (doc. 11), the Plaintiff has twice replied (docs. 2) to which the Defendant, United States Surgical Corp. ![]() This matter is before the Court on Plaintiff, Ethicon Endo-Surgery's Motion For a Preliminary Injunction (doc. ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR A PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION *1501 *1502 *1503 Robert Alexander Pitcairn, Jr., Katz, Teller, Brant & Hild Co., Cincinnati, OH, for plaintiff.ĭaniel Jerome Buckley, Vorys, Sater, Seymour & Pease, Cincinnati, OH, for U.S. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |