Block on Trump's Asylum Ban Upheld by Supreme Court
In an antitrust action claiming that plaintiffs overpaid for defendant's pulse oximetry sensors because defendant used improper marketing agreements and made its sensors incompatible with generic products, summary judgment for defendant is affirmed where: 1) there was no evidence that defendant foreclosed competition in a substantial share of the sensor market; and 2) the undisputed evidence showed that defendant's patented sensor design was an improvement over the previous design.
Argued and Submitted December 8, 2009
Filed January 6, 2010
Opinion by Judge Silverman