Section 00

Who he is

A $61.5 million verdict against a patent lawyer is public. Patents exist. The company was real. This page is the person, not the charge.

Inventor loses patent. $61.5M.

San Diego Superior Court 37-2013-00066639-CU-PN-CTL

Protective needle device

Fig. 1 · warehouse USPTO still

Vice chairman listing

Compatible with power-of-attorney voting. Not proof he was in the room

The live case

Asbaghi vs Asbaghi · 25CU01380C

Documented · public

Nydegger

San Diego Superior Court 37-2013-00066639-CU-PN-CTL. Jury figures printed in contemporaneous coverage: $61,587,000 gross / $46,190,250 net after 25% comparative. Hon. Kevin A. Enright. A verdict that a lawyer mishandled patents is not a finding about a hospital implant. It is who he was in that courtroom.

Search the caption 37-2013-00066639-CU-PN-CTL

Documented · USPTO

Patents

Safety-catheter / needle work associated with his name includes US5688241, US6379336, US6530905. Legal status will be printed as USPTO prints it once those pages are mounted. Expired-for-fee is part of the Nydegger record, not a smear.

Google Patents · inventor search

Documented · company

Padtan Elm

The company existed. Kits were sold. A public website is archived from at least 2002. After 1999, his name on company paper is treated as his mother using the 1999 power of attorney unless a page independently shows his own hand. Name-on-paper is not presence and not payment. His claim is that he received nothing from the company.

The Company

Documented · device calendar

Palmaz-Schatz

First coronary implant December 1987. International coronary use was already underway by 1991. U.S. iliac approval 1991; U.S. coronary approval August 1994. That U.S. date does not close 1991–93 work in Tehran. The calendar makes the introduction possible. It does not currently print his name on a shipment.

The Company · stent calendar

His account

How he tells it

The first-person narrative is checked chapter by chapter against originals. It is his account of how he arrived at these claims. It is not itself an exhibit.

The account

Documented20 Oct 2016

Asbaghi v. Nydegger — jury verdict report

Cropped from the warehouse PDF of the Jury Verdict Alert write-up. Website menu, search, and Print chip removed. Headline and case block as printed. Not a courtroom photograph.

Headline: Inventor loses patent, blames law office negligence. $61.5M. San Diego County. Case 37-2013-00066639-CU-PN-CTL. Verdict 20 Oct 2016. Gross $61,587,000 / net $46,190,250 after 25% comparative. Hon. Kevin A. Enright. Plaintiffs Hooman Asbaghi and HBA Medical Group, Inc.

Establishes. A public verdict report prints those figures and that caption for the Nydegger malpractice case.

Does not establish. A patent-lawyer verdict is not a finding about a hospital implant, a 2013 share taking, or monitoring.

Facts

Source: Folder 1 / Hooman´s Past Legal Cases / Asbaghi Vs Nydegger / Asbaghi v. Nydegger.pdf