Cases

ORDER GRANTING IN PART DEFENDANT TRAGUS SURGICAL, INC.’S MOTION TO DISMISS; AND DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO STAY AND MOTION TO CONTINUE HEARING Dale A. Drozd, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE This matter is before the court on three motions: defendant Tragus Surgical, Inc.’s motion to dismiss plaintiffs complaint (Doc. No. 29); plaintiff Stryker Sales Cor*612

ORDER ON PETITION FOR REHEARING EN BANC PER CURIAM. Appellees Stryker Corporation, Stryker Puerto Rico, Ltd., and Stryker Sales Corporation filed a petition for rehearing en banc. A response to the petition was invited by the court and filed by appellants Zimmer, Inc. and Zimmer Surgical, Inc. Leave to file a reply was granted, and a reply was filed by the appellees. The petition was i

FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT DEPUY SYNTHES SALES, INC., a No. 21-55126 Massachusetts corporation; JONATHAN L. WABER, an individual, D.C. No. Plaintiffs-Appellees, 5:18-cv-01557- FMO-KK v. HOWMEDICA OSTEONICS CORP., OPINION Defendant-Appellant, and STRYKER CORPORATION,

BOYER, Chief Judge (concurring specially) . I concur in reversal and remand. Upon remand a trial should be held on the merits. The record-on-appeal does not reveal a demand for jury trial but neither does it affirmatively reveal that no such demand was made. Whether the case is tried before the court or by jury will, of course, depend upon whether or not a timely demand for jury trial was made.

Bradford, Judge. Case Summary [1] Beginning in 2012, Heraeus Medical GmbH and Zimmer Surgical, Inc., had an agreement pursuant to which Zimmer Surgical had exclusive United States distribution rights to certain bone cements manufactured by Heraeus Medical GmbH and sold under the brand name Palacos ("the Distribution Agreement"). Zimmer Surgical is a subsidiary of Zi

FILED Dec 03 2019, 12:04 pm CLERK Indiana Supreme Court Court of Appeals and Tax Court

OPINION Opinion by Justice Francis Zimmer, Inc. filed this petition for writ of mandamus after the trial court granted a motion for new trial in this product liability suit. Because we conclude the trial court abused its discretion in ordering a new trial, we conditionally grant mandamus relief. This case arises

OPINION AND ORDER William C. Lee, Judge, United States District Court, Northern District of Indiana This matter is before the court on the Motion to Dismiss Count I of Plaintiffs Complaint and memorandum in support filed by the Defendant, Troy Mire, on March 8, 2016, along with a supporting *845memorandum (DE 6 and 7). The Plaintiff, Zimmer US Inc.

476 F.Supp.2d 1024 (2007) ZIMMER TECHNOLOGY, INC. and Zimmer, Inc., Plaintiffs, v. HOWMEDICA OSTEONICS CORP., Defendant. No. 3:02CV-425 AS. United States District Court, N.D. Indiana, South Bend Division. February 22, 2007. *1025 *1026 Bryan S. Hales, Bryce C. Pilz, Christopher R. Liro, Mark A

MEMORANDUM GREGORY M. SLEET, Chief Judge. I.INTRODUCTION In this correction of inventorship action, plaintiffs W. Norman Scott, M.D., (“Dr. Scott”) and Giles R. Scuderi, M.D., (“Dr. Scuderi” or collectively, “the plaintiffs”) seek to add themselves as inventors of U.S. Patent No. 6,123,729, U.S. Patent No. 6,402,786, and U.S. Patent No. 6,319,283 (“the patents”) presently assig

PHILIP P. SIMON, JUDGE *826Plaintiffs Rajesh M. Shah, Matt Brierley, Eric Levy and UFCW Local 1500, which I'll refer to in this opinion as either "Shah" or "plaintiffs", bring this putative securities fraud class action on behalf of themselves and all other similarly situated individuals who bought shares in Zimmer Biomet Holdings, Inc. ("ZBH")

IN THE COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE IN RE ZIMMER BIOMET HOLDINGS, ) CONSOLIDATED INC. DERIVATIVE LITIGATION ) C.A. No. 2019-0455-LWW MEMORANDUM OPINION Date Submitted: June 15, 2021 Date Decided: August 25, 2021 P. Bradford deLeeuw, DELEEUW LAW LLC, Wilmington, Delaware; Richard A. Speirs and Christopher Lometti, COHEN MILSTEIN SELLERS & TOLL PLLC, New York, New Yor

In the United States Court of Appeals For the Seventh Circuit ____________________ No. 21-1224 INSTITUTO MEXICANO DEL SEGURO SOCIAL, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. ZIMMER BIOMET HOLDINGS, INC., Defendant-Appellee. ____________________ Appeal from the United States District Cou

662 F.3d 448 (2011) Bruce BARTON, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. ZIMMER, INC., Defendant-Appellee. No. 10-2212. United States Court of Appeals, Seventh Circuit. Argued November 5, 2010. Decided October 18, 2011. *450 Cynthia Rockwell (argued), Attorney, Rockwell & Jansen, Fort Wayne, IN, for Plaintiff-Appellant.

Justice WILLETT delivered the opinion of the Court. This tax-refund case concerns the Tax Code’s sale-for-resale exemption, which grants purchasers of taxable goods and services a sales-tax exemption if they resell the items (since the ultimate purchaser will pay any tax due). Here, a government contractor seeks sales-tax refunds for purchases used to administer federal health-insurance programs. The question

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER HENRY R. WILHOLT, JR., District Judge. This matter is before the Court upon Defendants Zimmer Holdings, Inc. and Zimmer, Inc.’s Motion for Award of Attorney’s Fees and Expert Expenses [Docket No. 30]. Defendants seek $47,147.50 in fees and expenses incurred in their defense of this case, from January 7, 2014 until July 31, 2014. For the reasons set forth below, the Cou

2005 WY 156 RONALD MUELLER, as an individual and Director of the Star Valley Ranch Association; and WILLIAM L. DALEY, an individual, Appellants (Plaintiffs), v. VINCE ZIMMER, an individual; and STEVE CRITTENDEN, an individual, Appellees (Defendants). RONALD MUELLER, as an individual and Director of the Star Valley Ranch Association; and WILLIAM L. DALEY, an individual, Appellants (Plaintiffs), v. STAR VALLEY RANCH ASSOCIATION, a Wyomi

WATT, C.J. T1 A single dispositive issue is presented on appeal: whether the affidavit of merit1 requirement of 63 O.S. Supp2008 § 1-1708.1E2 * is constitutional. We determine *863that the statute is an unconstitutional special law prohibited by the Oklahoma Constitution art. 5, § 46.3

454 F.Supp.2d 839 (2006) Kris A. ZIMMER, Plaintiff, v. The TRAVELERS INSURANCE CO.; St. Paul Travelers Gas. Inc.; Constitution State Services, LLC; The Continental Insurance Co. a/k/a CNA; and Wells Fargo & Company, Defendants. No. 4:04-cv-00542. United States District Court, S.D. Iowa, Central Division. October 6, 2006. *840

521 F.Supp.2d 910 (2007) Kris A. ZIMMER, Plaintiff, v. The TRAVELERS INSURANCE CO.; St. Paul Travelers Cos. Inc.; Constitution State Services, LLC; The Continental Insurance Co. a/k/a CNA; and Wells Fargo & Company, Defendants. No. 4:04-cv-00542. United States District Court, S.D. Iowa, Central Division. November 20, 2007. *911