legal-news

Medtimo Inc. v. Allurion Technologies, Inc.

25-cv-01193
Active Hearing stage Sign in to follow this case
Share mail
Advertisement
description

Case Summary

This entry duplicates case 16656 — same title, docket number 25-cv-01193, and identical docket activity. Medtimo Inc. v. Allurion Technologies, Inc. appears once in the system as two separate case IDs. No distinct procedural history or claims separate this record from case 16656. The analysis for that matter applies here in full.

Latest development

1:25-cv-01193 Medtimo Inc. v. Allurion Technologies, Inc.

Hearing · April 20, 2026

A scheduling hearing was held in Medtimo Inc. v. Allurion Technologies, Inc., Case No. 1:25-cv-01193, setting case deadlines and hearing dates. The docket entry references internal deadline-setting activity, suggesting the court is moving the case into its active litigation track.

description View filing

Key Issues

  • Duplicate docket entry requiring reconciliation
  • Medical technology commercial or IP dispute
  • Data integrity issue in case tracking system
smart_toy Juryvine case summary generated from primary court records. How we verify our work.

update What Changed This Week

1 event

Juryvine summaries are generated from court records. Expand "Source" on any row to see the underlying filing.

Advertisement

Case Timeline

1 event
groups
Hearing April 20, 2026

1:25-cv-01193 Medtimo Inc. v. Allurion Technologies, Inc.

A scheduling hearing was held in Medtimo Inc. v. Allurion Technologies, Inc., Case No. 1:25-cv-01193, setting case deadlines and hearing dates. The docket entry references internal deadline-setting activity, suggesting the court is moving the case into its active litigation track.

Advertisement
newspaper

Press Coverage

1 article
settings_backup_restore Data provenance expand_more

Sources tracked

1 outlet · 1 article

Timeline events

1 record on file

Last updated

2 hours, 4 minutes ago

Juryvine aggregates docket entries from PACER/CourtListener, press coverage, and GDELT signals. Ingestion timestamps do not appear in the What Changed feed — that reflects real court activity only.