1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. F.3d
  4. 309 F.3d
  5. 309 F.3d 1365 (2002)
 

INVERNESS MEDICAL v. PRINCETON BIOMEDITECH CORP.

No. 01-1188.

309 F.3d 1365 (2002)

INVERNESS MEDICAL SWITZERLAND GmbH and Unipath Diagnostics, Inc., Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. PRINCETON BIOMEDITECH CORPORATION, Defendant-Appellee.

United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit.

DECIDED: October 31, 2002.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

J. Anthony Downs, Goodwin Procter LLP, of Boston, Massachusetts, argued for plaintiffs-appellants. Of counsel were Paul F. Ware, Jr. and Roland H. Schwillinski. Also of counsel was Keith A. Zullow, Goodwin Procter LLP, of New York, New York.

Richard L. DeLucia, Kenyon & Kenyon, of New York, New York, argued for defendant-appellee. Of counsel were Elizabeth A. Gardner and Stefan C. Grant, M.D.

Before RADER, BRYSON, and DYK, Circuit Judges.

DYK, Circuit Judge.

Inverness Medical Switzerland GmbH and Unipath Diagnostics, Inc. (collectively "Unipath") appeal from the decision of the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey granting summary judgment of non-infringement of U.S. Patent Nos. 5,622,871 ("the '871 patent"), 5,602,040 ("the '040 patent"), and 5,656,506 ("the '506 patent") (collectively "the patents-in-suit"). Conopco, Inc. v. Princeton Biomeditech Corp., No. 97-6254 ...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases