Cases

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER RUBEN CASTILLO, District Judge. Body Science, LLC (“Body Science” or “Plaintiff’), brings this patent infringement action pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 1, et seq. against Boston Scientific Corporation (“Boston Scientific”), LifeWatch Services, Inc. (“LifeWatch”), Philips Electronics North America Corporation, doing business as Philips Healthcare (“Philips”), Pola

694 F.Supp.2d 106 (2010) ORBUSNEICH MEDICAL CO., LTD., BVI, and OrbusNeich Medical Inc., Plaintiffs, v. BOSTON SCIENTIFIC CORPORATION, Defendant. Civil Action No. 09-10962-JLT. United States District Court, D. Massachusetts. March 18, 2010. *108 Scott T. Bluni, Joshua M. Dalton, Lawrence T. Stanley, Jr., Bingham McCutchen LLP, Bo

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE DAWNETTE BREDBERG ) AND MICHAEL BREDBERG ) ) Plaintiffs, ) ) C.A. No.: N20C-10-031 PEL v. ) ) Boston Scientific Corporation ) (D/B/A Mansfield Scientific, Inc.)

526 F.Supp.2d 613 (2007) MEDTRONIC VASCULAR INC., et al., Plaintiffs, v. BOSTON SCIENTIFIC CORP., et al., Defendants. Civil Action No. 2:06-CV-78. United States District Court, E.D. Texas, Marshall Division. December 13, 2007. *614 Samuel Franklin Baxter, McKool Smith, Marshall, TX, Bradley Wayne Caldwell, Jason Dodd Cassady, Mar

*********************************************** The “officially released” date that appears near the be- ginning of each opinion is the date the opinion will be pub- lished in the Connecticut Law Journal or the date it was released as a slip opinion. The operative date for the be- ginning of all time periods for filing postopinion motions and petitions for certification is the “officially released” date appearing in the opinion. All opinions are subject to modification and technical corr

SUPREME COURT OF MISSOURI en banc EVE SHERRER, ) Opinion issued October 13, 2020 ) Appellant, ) ) v. ) No. SC97465 ) BOSTON SCIENTIFIC CORPORATION

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER (Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment) JOSEPH R. GOODWIN, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE Pending before the court is Defendant Boston Scientific Corporation’s Motion for Summary Judgment and Memorandum in Support Against Plaintiffs Julie Adams and James Adams (“Motion”) [Docket 58]. As set forth below, the defendant’s Motion is GRANTED IN PART w

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER (Motions for Summary Judgment on Substantive Claims and Punitive Damages) JOSEPH R. GOODWIN, District Judge. Pending before the court is Boston Scientific Corporation’s Motion for Summary Judgment [Docket 60], the Plaintiffs’ Motion for Summary Judgment [Docket 62], and Boston Scientific Corporation’s Motion for Partial Summary Judgment on Plaintiffs’ Punit

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER (Daubert Motions) JOSEPH R. GOODWIN, District Judge. The following motions have been brought by the defendant, Boston Scientific Corporation (“BSC”): (1) Motion to Exclude the Testimony of Richard W. Trepeta, M.D. [Docket 86]; (2) Motion to Exclude the Testimony of Dr. Michael Thomas Margolis [Docket 88]; (3) Motion to Exclude the Testimony of Thom

Miller, Rosalind H., J. After her husband James J. Dwyer (“decedent”) died, the plaintiff Agnes P. Dwyer (“plaintiff’) commenced this action against defendant Boston Scientific Corp. (“defendant”), alleging that the medical device that the defendant had manufactured and that had been implanted in the decedent had a manufacturing defect that caused the decedent’s death. This case is before the court on the defendant’s motion to d

ORDER JANE MAGNUS-STINSON, District Judge. Presently pending before the Court are: (1) Defendant Boston Scientific Corporation’s (“Boston Scientific”) Motion for Summary Judgment, [dkt. 140]; and (2) Pro se Plaintiff Adeniran Oyebade’s Motion to Supplement Response/Answers to Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment, [dkt. 153]. I. Litiga

OPINION STARK, U.S. District Judge: Presently before the Court is Defendants Cook Group Incorporated (“CGI”) and Cook Medical LLC’s (“Cook Medical”) (collectively, “Defendants” or “Cook”) motion to dismiss for improper venue or, alternatively, to transfer venue in fight of the Supreme Court’s decision in TC Heartland LLC v. Kraft Foods Group Brands LLC, — U.S. -, 137 S.Ct. 1514, 197 L.Ed.2d 816 (

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE Carl Alexander Cohen, v. Case No. 1:20-cv-00943-PB Opinion No. 2024 DNH 026 Boston Scientific Corporation, et al. MEMORANDUM AND ORDER The plaintiff, Alex Cohen, underwent surgery for an enlarged prostate that resulted in diffuse thermal burns to his bladder. He brought a prod

422 F.Supp.2d 1102 (2006) BOSTON SCIENTIFIC CORPORATION, et al., Plaintiffs, v. CORDIS CORPORATION, Defendant. No. C 02-01474 JW. United States District Court, N.D. California, San Jose Division. March 1, 2006. *1103 *1104 Michael Francis Kelleher, Julie Lynn Fieber, Folger Levin & Kahn LL

431 F.Supp.2d 442 (2006) CORDIS CORPORATION, Plaintiff, v. BOSTON SCIENTIFIC CORPORATION, Boston Scientific Scimed, Inc., and Medtronic Ave, Inc. Defendants. Boston Scientific Corporation, Plaintiff, v. Cordis Corporation, Ethicon, Inc. and Johnson & Johnson Interventional Systems Co., Defendants. No. CIV.A. 97-550-SLR, CIV.A. 98-19-SLR. United States District Court, D. Delaware.

534 F.Supp.2d 1062 (2007) BOSTON SCIENTIFIC CORPORATION, et al., Plaintiffs, v. JOHNSON & JOHNSON, et al., Defendants. No. C 02-00790 SI. United States District Court, N.D. California. August 21, 2007. *1063 *1064 *1065 *10

392 F.Supp.2d 676 (2005) BOSTON SCIENTIFIC SCIMED, INC. and Boston Scientific Corporation, Plaintiffs, v. CORDIS CORPORATION and Johnson & Johnson, Inc., Defendants. Boston Scientific Scimed, Inc. and Boston Scientific Corporation, Plaintiffs, v. Cordis Corporation, Guidant Corporation, Guidant Sales Corporation, Johnson & Johnson, Inc., and Advanced Cardiovascular Systems, Inc., Defendants. Nos. CIV. 03-

PUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 13-1779 QUINTON BROWN; JASON GUY; ALVIN SIMMONS; SHELDON SINGLETARY; GERALD WHITE; RAMON ROANE; JACOB RAVENELL, individually and on behalf of the class they seek to represent, Plaintiffs - Appellants, v. NUCOR CORPORATION; NUCOR STEEL-BERKELEY, Defendants - Appelle

Digitally signed by Reporter of Decisions Reason: I attest to Illinois Official Reports the accuracy and

983 F.Supp. 245 (1997) BOSTON SCIENTIFIC CORP., Plaintiff, Defendant-in-Counterclaim, v. SCHNEIDER (EUROPE) AG, and Schneider (USA) Inc., Defendants and Counterclaimants, v. SCIMED LIFE SYSTEMS, INC., Defendant-in-Counterclaim. BOSTON SCIENTIFIC CORP. and Scimed Life Systems, Inc., Plaintiffs, v. ADVANCED CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS, INC., and Schneider (Europe) AG, and Schneider (USA), Inc. Defendants. CIV. A