Baxter Healthcare Corporation and Utah Medical Products, Inc. v. Spectramed, Inc., Defendant/cross-Appellant

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• declining to remand because “[o]n appeal we are free to examine the record to determine whether the facts support the judgment”
• declining to remand because “[o]n appeal we are free to examine the record to determine whether the facts support the judgment”
• precluding non-infringement defense that relied on showing product was more similar to prior art than asserted patent
• stating the determination of inequitable conduct is committed to the discretion of the trial court and reviewed for abuse of discretion
• affirming a district court’s refusal to enter judg- ment for plaintiff on two special interrogatories setting forth affirmative defenses when the jury did not unanimously agree on answers to the interrogatories
• moving directly to step two of the analysis because “the parties do not dispute the meaning of the claim terms,” and thus, “[t]he question instead turns on whether the accused devices infringe the claims as written”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).