Lenox MacLaren Surgical Corp. v. Medtronic, Inc.

How courts have described this case

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

• explaining that issues that are not adequately briefed will not be considered on appeal
• observing that the “stringent trade- disparagement test” “presumes that trade disparagement bears only a de minimis effect on competition,” assuming certain factors are not met, including that the disparagement was “clearly false”
• noting that issues not adequately briefed will not be considered on appeal
• applying, without adopting, the six-factor rebuttable presumption and holding that Lenox created a question of material fact regarding three of the factors
• declining to consider argument made during oral argument when it had not been adequately briefed
• AThe differing definitions create a fact question on the product market, precluding summary judgment. A

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).