WDNY – Indicative Motion: Medgraph, Inc. v. Medtronic, Inc.

U.S. District Court, WDNY

Indicative Motion

Basis for Relief – Underlying Predicate Motion

Medgraph, Inc. v. Medtronic, Inc.

09-CV-6610L

Judge Larimer

Background: Following summary judgment for the defendant dismissing the complaint against it, the plaintiff has filed a motion for an indicative ruling pursuant to Rule 62.1 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The underlying summary judgment involved two patents which relate to the electronic collection and storage of patient date and the transmission of such data to physicians and other health care professionals.

Ruling: The District Court denied the motion. The court held that the rule only applies when a timely motion has been made for relief that the court lacks jurisdiction to grant, because of the pendency of an appeal. Absent an underlying, predicate motion, there is no basis for relief under Rule 62.1. The plaintiff has failed to file any motions for relief other than the one currently before the court.

Dairush Keyhani and Sidney R. Bresnick of Meredith & Keyhanit for the plaintiff; Azar Mouzari, Andrew Demko, Kareem Ghanem and Wayne Barsky of Gibson Dunn & Crutcher, and Eric J. Ward and Jeffrey J. Harradine of Ward Greenberg Heller & Reidy for the defendant