Nevro Corp. v. Stimwave Technologies, Inc.

APPEAL NO.
19-2205
OP. BELOW
DCT
OPINION
TBD
SUBJECT
Patent
AUTHOR
TBD

Issue(s) Presented

1. “Whether the district court clearly erred by finding that Nevro was irreparably harmed.”

2. “Whether the district court erred legally by not holding the term ‘nonparesthesia- producing . . . signal’ to be indefinite.”

3. “Whether the district court erred legally or clearly erred factually by finding the claims at issue not anticipated by, or obvious over, prior art to Royle.”

4. “Whether the district court clearly erred by finding that the preliminary injunction would not injure the public interest.”

5. “Whether the injunction is overbroad in scope.”

Posts About this Case