The AI workspace for legal professionals
- Legal research with access to more than 1 million sources
- Document automation
- Matter management
- Hosted in the EU and Switzerland
Try it free for 14 days (10 questions/day during trial)
The AI workspace for legal professionals
Try it free for 14 days (10 questions/day during trial)
13-1668•Stryker Corporation, Stryker Puerto Rico, Ltd., Stryker Sales Corporation v. Zimmer, Inc., Zimmer Surgical, Inc.
13-1668Court of Appeals for the Federal CircuitMar 23, 2015
United States Court of Appeals
for the Federal Circuit
______________________
STRYKER CORPORATION, STRYKER PUERTO
RICO, LTD., STRYKER SALES CORPORATION,
Plaintiffs-Appellees
v.
ZIMMER, INC., ZIMMER SURGICAL, INC.,
Defendants-Appellants
ZIMMER ORTHOPAEDIC SURGICAL PRODUCTS,
Defendant
______________________
2013-1668
______________________
Appeal from the United States District Court for the
Western District of Michigan in No. 10-CV-1223, Judge
Robert J. Jonker.
______________________
ON PETITION FOR PANEL REHEARING
______________________
Before P ROST , Chief Judge, N EWMAN and H UGHES , Circuit
Judges.
P ER CURIAM .
O R D E R
A petition for rehearing en banc was filed by appellees
Stryker Corporation, Stryker Sales Corporation and
-- 1 of 2 --
STRYKER CORPORATION v. ZIMMER, INC. 2
Stryker Puerto Rico, Ltd. and a response thereto was
invited by the court and filed by appellant Zimmer Surgi-
cal, Inc. and Zimmer, Inc. This was followed by Stryker
Corporation, Stryker Sales Corporation and Stryker
Puerto Rico, Ltd.’s Motion for Leave to File a Reply in
Support of its Petition for Rehearing. The motion was
granted. The petition, response, and reply were referred
to the panel that heard the appeal.
I T I S O RDERED T HAT :
(1) Appellees’ petition is granted by the panel for the
limited purpose of clarifying the discussion of the stand-
ard of review of the objective reckless prong of willful
infringement.
(2) The previous opinion in this appeal issued Decem-
ber 19, 2014 and reported at Stryker Corp. v. Zimmer,
Inc., 774 F.3d 1349 (Fed. Cir. 2014) is withdrawn and
replaced with the revised opinion accompanying this
order.
F OR THE COURT
March 23, 2015 /s/ Daniel E. O’Toole
Date Daniel E. O’Toole
Clerk of Court
-- 2 of 2 --
Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.