1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. F.3d
  4. 358 F.3d
  5. 358 F.3d 898 (2004)
 

LIEBEL-FLARSHEIM COMPANY v. MEDRAD, INC.

Nos. 03-1082, 03-1165.

358 F.3d 898 (2004)

LIEBEL-FLARSHEIM COMPANY and Mallinckrodt Inc., Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. MEDRAD, INC., Defendant-Cross Appellant.

United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit.

Decided February 11, 2004.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

J. Robert Chambers, Wood, Herron & Evans, L.L.P., of Cincinnati, OH, argued for plaintiffs-appellants. With him on the brief was Theodore R. Remaklus.

James F. Davis, Howrey Simon Arnold & White, LLP, of Washington, DC, argued for defendant-cross appellant. On the brief for the defendant-cross appellant were Frederick H. Colen and Barry J. Coyne, Reed Smith LLP, of Pittsburgh, PA. Of counsel was Kirsten R. Rydstrom, Reed Smith LLP, of Pittsburgh, PA.

Before LOURIE, BRYSON, and DYK, Circuit Judges.

BRYSON, Circuit Judge.

Appellants Liebel-Flarsheim Company and Mallinckrodt Inc. (collectively, "Liebel") filed an action against appellee Medrad, Inc., in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Ohio, No. C-1-98-858, charging Medrad with infringement of four of Liebel's patents. The patents claim certain methods and devices for use in connection with powered fluid injectors, which can be used to inject fluids into patients during medical procedures...

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