green
Positive treatment
Quoted verbatim 1×
5.3 score
G Cite
Treatment trajectory · 1998 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1998
2012
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 9 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited as authority (quoted)
Worthy v. Collagen Corp.
unlike the general federal requirements discussed in medtronic, the regulations governing investigational devices are essentially device specific.
discussed
Cited "see"
Parker v. Stryker Corp.
See Enlow v. St Jude Medical, Inc., 210 F.Supp.2d 853, 861-62 (W.D.Ky.2001) (citing Martin v. Telectronics Pacing Systems, Inc., 105 F.3d 1090, 1100 (6th Cir.1997), cert. denied, 522 U.S. 1075 , 118 S.Ct. 850 , 139 L.Ed.2d 751 (1998)).
discussed
Cited "see"
Michaelis v. Deluxe Financial Services, Inc.
See Martin v. Telectronics Pacing Sys., Inc., 105 F.3d 1090, 1101 (6th Cir.1997), cert. denied, 522 U.S. 1075 , 118 S.Ct. 850 , 139 L.Ed.2d 751 (1998); Spinelli v. Gaughan, 12 F.3d 853, 857-58 (9th Cir.1993).
cited
Cited "see"
Johnson v. E.A. Miller, Inc.
See Brandt v. Shop ‘N Save Warehouse Foods, Inc., 108 F.3d 935, 938 (8th Cir. 1997), cert. denied, 118 S. Ct. 850 (1998).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Weiland v. Telectronics Pacing Systems, Inc.
See also Martin v. Telectronics Pacing Systems, Inc., 105 F.3d 1090 (6th Cir.1997), cert. denied, ___ U.S. ___, 118 S.Ct. 850 , 139 L.Ed.2d 751 (1998) (state law claims preempted by MDA for pacemaker marketed under investigational exception to PMA process); Chambers v. Osteonics Corp., 109 F.3d 1243 (7th Cir.1997) (state law claims related to device marketed under investigational exception preempted to extent would impose greater requirement than those already imposed by FDA); Papike v. Tambrands, Inc., 107 F.3d 737 (9th Cir.1997), cert. denied, ___ U.S. ___, 118 S.Ct. 166 , 139 L.Ed.2d 110 (1…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
State v. Adel
See also Rashad v. Burt, 108 F.3d 677, 679-80 (6th Cir.1997) ("[T]he Blockburger test is insufficient where ... the concern is not multiple charges under separate statutes, but rather successive prosecutions for conduct that may constitute the same act or transaction."), cert. denied, ___ U.S. ___, 118 S.Ct. 850 , 139 L.Ed.2d 751 (1998); United States v. Woods, 568 F.2d 509 , 513 n. 1 (6th Cir.1978).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
State v. Adel
See also Rashad v. Burt, 108 F.3d 677, 679-80 (6th Cir. 1997) (“[T]he Blockburger test is insufficient where . . . the concern is not multiple charges under separate statutes, but rather successive prosecutions for conduct that may constitute the same act or transaction.”), cert. denied, 522 U.S. 1075 , 118 S. Ct. 850 , 139 L.
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
Litton Systems, Inc. v. Honeywell, Inc.
See, e.g., Martin v. Telectronics Pacing Sys., Inc., 105 F.3d 1090, 1092 (6th Cir.1997), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 118 S.Ct. 850 , 139 L.Ed.2d 751 (1998).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Schottenstein, Zox & Dunn (In Re Unitcast, Inc.)
See, e.g., Corzin v. Fordu (In re Fordu), 209 B.R. 854, 857 (6th Cir. BAP 1997) (citing Martin v. Telectronics Pacing Sys., Inc., 105 F.3d 1090 (6th Cir.1997), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 118 S.Ct. 850 , 139 L.Ed.2d 751 (1998)).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Burt, Warden
v.
Rashad
v.
Rashad
No. 97-343.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Jan 20, 1998.
Published
Citer courts: Texas Supreme Court (1)
C. A. 6th Cir. Cer-tiorari denied.