Try our Advanced Search for more refined results
- Law360
- Law360 UK
- Law360 Pulse
- Law360 Employment Authority
- Law360 Tax Authority
- Law360 Insurance Authority
- Law360 Real Estate Authority
- Law360 Healthcare Authority
- Law360 Bankruptcy Authority
- Products
- Lexis®
- Law360 In-Depth
- Law360 Podcasts
- Rankings
- Leaderboard Analytics
- Regional Powerhouses
- Law360's MVPs
- Women in Law Report
- Law360 400
- Diversity Snapshot
- Practice Groups of the Year
- Rising Stars
- Titans of the Plaintiffs Bar
- Sections
- Adv. Search & Platform Tools
- About all sections
- Browse all sections
- Banking
- Bankruptcy
- Class Action
- Competition
- Employment
- Energy
- Expert Analysis
- Insurance
- Intellectual Property
- Product Liability
- Securities
- Beta Tools
- Track docs
- Track attorneys
- Track judges
G David Jang MD v. Boston Scientific Corporation et al
Case Number:
5:05-cv-00426
Court:
Nature of Suit:
Judge:
Firms
- Arnold & Porter
- Gibson Dunn
- Latham & Watkins
- Morrison & Foerster
- Mundell Odlum
- Pasich LLP
- Paul Hastings
- Rutan & Tucker
Companies
Sectors & Industries:
-
October 01, 2015
Judge Clears Boston Scientific In $200M Stent Patent Case
A California federal judge has found that Boston Scientific Corp. did not infringe a stent patent asserted against it by cardiologist David Jang, who claimed that the company owed him more than $200 million in royalties, finding that the company was protected by the rarely invoked ensnarement defense.
-
July 09, 2015
CORRECTED: Jury Finds Boston Scientific Infringed Stent Patent
A California federal jury has found that Boston Scientific Corp. infringed a stent patent and breached a licensing deal with the cardiologist who designed the stents, a verdict the doctor says entitles him to more than $200 million in royalties and interest. Correction: An earlier headline and story incorrectly stated that damages had been calculated and awarded against Boston Scientific. The error has been corrected.