Medtronic, Inc. v. Lohr

Last updated
Medtronic, Inc. v. Lohr
Seal of the United States Supreme Court.svg
Argued April 23, 1996
Decided June 26, 1996
Full case name Medtronic, Inc., Petitioner 95-754 v. Lora Lohr, et vir; Lora Lohr, et vir, Petitioners 95-886 v. Medtronic, Inc.
Citations518 U.S. 470 ( more )
116 S. Ct. 2240; 135 L. Ed. 2d 700; 1996 U.S. LEXIS 4260; 64 U.S.L.W. 4625; CCH Prod. Liab. Rep. ¶ 14,634; 29 U.C.C. Rep. Serv. 2d (Callaghan) 1077; 96 Cal. Daily Op. Service 4685; 96 Daily Journal DAR 7557; 10 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. S 83
Court membership
Chief Justice
William Rehnquist
Associate Justices
John P. Stevens  · Sandra Day O'Connor
Antonin Scalia  · Anthony Kennedy
David Souter  · Clarence Thomas
Ruth Bader Ginsburg  · Stephen Breyer
Case opinions
MajorityStevens, joined by Kennedy, Souter, Ginsburg, Breyer (parts I, II, III, V, VII); Kennedy, Souter, Ginsburg (parts IV, VI)
ConcurrenceBreyer
Concur/dissentO'Connor, joined by Rehnquist, Scalia, Thomas

Medtronic, Inc. v. Lohr, 518 U.S. 470 (1996), is a United States Supreme Court case dealing with the scope of federal preemption. [1]

In the law of the United States, federal preemption is the invalidation of a U.S. state law that conflicts with federal law.

Contents

It was later limited by Riegel v. Medtronic, Inc. [2]

Riegel v. Medtronic, Inc., 552 U.S. 312 (2008), is a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that the pre-emption clause of the Medical Device Amendment bars state common-law claims that challenge the effectiveness or safety of a medical device marketed in a form that received premarket approval from the Food and Drug Administration.

See also

Eli Lilly and Company v. Medtronic, Inc., 496 U.S. 661 (1990), is a United States Supreme Court case related to patent infringement in the medical device industry. It held that 35 U.S.C. § 271(e)(1) of United States patent law exempted premarketing activity conducted to gain approval of a device under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act from a finding of infringement.

Related Research Articles

United States v. Virginia, 518 U.S. 515 (1996), is a landmark case in which the Supreme Court of the United States struck down the long-standing male-only admission policy of the Virginia Military Institute (VMI) in a 7–1 decision.

FDA Preemption is the legal theory in the United States that exempts product manufacturers from tort claims regarding Food and Drug Administration approved products. FDA Preemption has been a highly contentious issue. In general, consumer groups are against it while the FDA and pharmaceutical manufacturers are in favor of it, arguing that the FDA should set both the floor and the ceiling for drug regulation. Michigan is the only state that voluntarily applies FDA Preemption to its own state tort law through a regulatory compliance defense, although Michigan's law has been controversial and efforts to repeal it are underway.

Wyeth v. Levine, 555 U.S. 555 (2009), is a United States Supreme Court case holding that Federal regulatory approval of a medication does not shield the manufacturer from liability under state law.

Medtronic, Inc. v. Mirowski Family Ventures, LLC, 571 U.S. ___ (2014), is a case of the Supreme Court of the United States that deals with civil procedure, and specifically with the question of the burden of proof required in pursuing declaratory judgments.

References

  1. ↑ Medtronic, Inc. v. Lohr, 518 U.S. 470 (1996).
  2. ↑ Riegel v. Medtronic, Inc. , 552 U.S. 312 (2008).
<i>United States Reports</i> United States Supreme Court decisions

The United States Reports are the official record of the Supreme Court of the United States. They include rulings, orders, case tables, in alphabetical order both by the name of the petitioner and by the name of the respondent, and other proceedings. United States Reports, once printed and bound, are the final version of court opinions and cannot be changed. Opinions of the court in each case are prepended with a headnote prepared by the Reporter of Decisions, and any concurring or dissenting opinions are published sequentially. The Court's Publication Office oversees the binding and publication of the volumes of United States Reports, although the actual printing, binding, and publication are performed by private firms under contract with the United States Government Publishing Office.

This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.