Medical device preemption after Medtronic, Inc v Lohr

被引：0

|

作者：

Neraas, MB

机构：

来源：

FOOD AND DRUG LAW JOURNAL | 1996年 / 51卷 / 04期

关键词：

D O I：

暂无

中图分类号：

TS2 [食品工业];

学科分类号：

0832 ;

摘要：

引用

收藏

页码：619 / 629

页数：11

相关论文

共 50 条

[1] Premarket approval and federal preemption of product liability claims in the wake of Medtronic, Inc v Lohr
Jarcho, DG
[J]. FOOD AND DRUG LAW JOURNAL, 1996, 51 (04): : 613 - 618
[2] Life After Riegel: A Fresh Look at Medical Device Preemption One Year After Riegel v. Medtronic, Inc.
Wartman, Gregory J.
[J]. FOOD AND DRUG LAW JOURNAL, 2009, 64 (02) : 291 - 311
[3] Medtronic, Inc. v. Lohr: Bad medicine for manufacturers of unproven medical devices
Sigman, KT
[J]. CATHOLIC UNIVERSITY LAW REVIEW, 1998, 47 (02): : 721 - 762
[4] Weiland v. Telectronics Pacing Systems, Inc.:: Illinois reexamines medical device preemption
Allen, AS
[J]. INDIANA LAW JOURNAL, 2001, 76 (02) : 443 - 463
[5] Medtronic v. Lohr: For want of a word, the patient was almost lost - Fixing the mischief caused in Cipollone by dividing the preemption stream
Kleinhaus, SD
[J]. FOOD AND DRUG LAW JOURNAL, 1998, 53 (02) : 297 - 320
[6] Riegel v. Medtronic, Inc.: Revisiting Pre-emption for Medical Devices
Patsner, Bruce
[J]. JOURNAL OF LAW MEDICINE & ETHICS, 2009, 37 (02): : 305 - +
[7] “Medtronic v. Mirowski”Patent Law – Medtronic, Inc. v. Mirowski Family Ventures, LLC
[J]. IIC - International Review of Intellectual Property and Competition Law, 2014, 45 (7) : 825 - 825
[8] FIFRA PREEMPTION OF STATE COMMON-LAW CLAIMS AFTER CIPOLLONE V LIGGETT GROUP, INC
ALLNUTT, RD
[J]. WASHINGTON LAW REVIEW, 1993, 68 (04) : 859 - 880
[9] Internalizing the External Costs of Medical Device Preemption
Chang, David
[J]. HASTINGS LAW JOURNAL, 2013, 65 (01) : 283 - 308
[10] AMPLIFICATION OF FEDERAL PREEMPTION IN MEDICAL DEVICE CASES
NOAH, L
[J]. FOOD AND DRUG LAW JOURNAL, 1994, 49 (01): : 183 - 211

← 1 2 3 4 5 →