Case ID: f3d_98/html/0618-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM:", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Lora LOHR, Michael Lohr, Her Husband, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. MEDTRONIC, INC., a Foreign Corporation, Defendant-Appellee.
    No. 94-2516.
    United States Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit.
    Oct. 28, 1996.
    Daniel C. Shaughnessy, Cowles & Shaugh-nessy, PA., Jacksonville, FL, Robert F. Spohrer, Spohrer, Wilner & Maxwell, PA, Jacksonville, FL, Brian Wolfman, Public Citizen Litigation Group, Washington, DC, for plaintiffs-appellants.
    Dennis P. Waggoner, Hill, Ward & Henderson, P.A., Tampa, FL, Marcus R. Magnuson, Medtronic, Inc., Minneapolis, MN, Daniel G. Jareho, McKenna & Cuneo, Washington, DC, for defendant-appellee.
   ON REMAND FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

Before BLACK and BARKETT, Circuit Judges, and RONEY, Senior Circuit Judge.

PER CURIAM:

On June 26, 1996, the Supreme Court reversed this panel’s opinion in Lohr v. Medtronic, Inc., 56 F.3d 1335 (11th Cir.1995). See Medtronic, Inc. v. Lohr, — U.S.-, 116 S.Ct. 2240, 135 L.Ed.2d 700 (1996). Pursuant to the Supreme Court’s opinion, we now reverse the district court’s dismissal of plaintiffs complaint and remand the ease to the district court for further proceedings not inconsistent with the Supreme Court’s opinion.

REVERSED AND REMANDED.