This is the property of the Daily Journal Corporation and fully protected by copyright. It is made available only to Daily Journal subscribers for personal or collaborative purposes and may not be distributed, reproduced, modified, stored or transferred without written permission. Please click "Reprint" to order presentation-ready copies to distribute to clients or use in commercial marketing materials or for permission to post on a website. and copyright (showing year of publication) at the bottom.
Subscribe to the Daily Journal for access to Daily Appellate Reports, Verdicts, Judicial Profiles and more...

Intellectual Property

Jun. 17, 2024

Attorneys for urologist who lost trade secrets case seek new trial

They claim it should not have been left up to a jury to decide patent claims relating to a penile implant. Opposing counsel say that's irrelevant to the case.

A Houston urologist who lost a trade secrets case brought by a Beverly Hills doctor over the design of a penile implant is seeking a new trial on grounds a Los Angeles federal judge erred by leaving the question of patent claim construction to the jury.

Texas-based defense attorneys for Dr. Robert Cornell in a motion Thursday argued U.S. District Judge Consuelo B. Marshall's purported error was inconsistent with a 1996 U.S. Supreme Court ruling that held judges, rather than j...

To continue reading, please subscribe.
For only $95 a month (the price of 2 article purchases)
Receive unlimited article access and full access to our archives,
Daily Appellate Report, award winning columns, and our
Verdicts and Settlements.
$795 for an entire year!

Or access this article for $45
(Purchase provides 7-day access to this article. Printing, posting or downloading is not allowed.)

Already a subscriber?