Search

Visual Pressure Regulating Catheter Patent - Qingdao Biotech Medical

USPTO granted Patent US12605161B2 to QINGDAO BIOTECH MEDICAL CO., LTD on April 21, 2026, covering a visual pressure regulating catheter with integrated hydraulic dilation balloon, pressure regulating handle, endoscope pressure regulating cavity, and dilation liquid perfusion cavity. The invention enables direct endoscopic observation through the catheter into the dilation balloon. The patent contains 13 claims and lists CPC classifications spanning A61B, A61M, and related medical device categories.

Vidal v. Venettozzi - Due Process Rights in Prison Disciplinary Segregation

The Second Circuit vacated the Southern District of New York's summary judgment in favor of DOCCS officials and remanded the case, holding that Joseph Vidal's 270-day disciplinary segregation sentence constitutes an atypical and significant hardship based on duration alone, thereby implicating a protected liberty interest under the Fourteenth Amendment. The court disagreed with the district court's conclusion that Vidal's SHU confinement did not trigger due process protections, finding that whether measuring the 270 days imposed, the 180 days actually served, or any other applicable period, the confinement duration was sufficient to require procedural safeguards. Correctional systems must now apply due process protections to disciplinary hearings resulting in extended segregation of this length.

Vidal v. Venettozzi - Prison Disciplinary SHU Segregation Due Process

The Second Circuit vacated the Southern District of New York's grant of summary judgment to New York Department of Corrections and Community Supervision (DOCCS) officials, holding that 270 days of disciplinary segregation in the special housing unit (SHU) constitutes an atypical and significant hardship based on duration alone, triggering 14th Amendment procedural due process protections. Plaintiff-Appellant Joseph Vidal served at least 180 days of the 270-day sentence. The court found that Vidal was denied basic procedural protections at his disciplinary hearing, including the opportunity to call witnesses and present documentary evidence. The judgment is remanded for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.

Vidal v. Venettozzi - Prison Disciplinary Due Process

The Second Circuit vacated the Southern District of New York's summary judgment in favor of DOCCS officials and remanded the case, holding that Joseph Vidal's 180 to 270 days of disciplinary segregation in the Special Housing Unit constitutes an atypical and significant hardship based on duration alone, thereby triggering Fourteenth Amendment due process protections. The court found that Vidal was denied basic procedural protections including the opportunity to call witnesses and present documentary evidence at his disciplinary hearing. This ruling establishes that lengthy prison disciplinary segregation terms automatically implicate a protected liberty interest requiring due process.

Vidal v. Venettozzi - Prison Disciplinary Due Process

The Second Circuit vacated the Southern District of New York's summary judgment for DOCCS officials and remanded the case, holding that Joseph Vidal's 270-day disciplinary segregation sentence (180 days actually served) constitutes an atypical and significant hardship based on duration alone, thereby implicating a protected liberty interest under the Fourteenth Amendment. The court disagreed with the district court that no due process protections were required, finding that the length of confinement was sufficient to trigger procedural due process protections including the opportunity to call witnesses and present documentary evidence.

Vidal v. Venettozzi - Prison Disciplinary Due Process

The Second Circuit vacated summary judgment for DOCCS officials and remanded the case, holding that Joseph Vidal's 270-day (180 days served) disciplinary segregation in the special housing unit represents an atypical and significant hardship under Sandin v. Conner, thereby triggering Fourteenth Amendment due process protections. The court disagreed with the district court's conclusion that such confinement did not implicate a protected liberty interest, establishing that duration alone can suffice to trigger constitutional protections.

Vidal v. Venettozzi - Prison Disciplinary Due Process

The Second Circuit vacated the Southern District of New York's summary judgment in favor of New York DOCCS officials, holding that Joseph Vidal's 180-270 days of disciplinary segregation in the Special Housing Unit constituted an atypical and significant hardship based on duration alone, thereby implicating a protected liberty interest under the Fourteenth Amendment. The court held that Vidal was entitled to due process protections at his disciplinary hearing, including the opportunity to call witnesses and present documentary evidence. The case has been remanded for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.

Vidal v. Venettozzi - Prison Disciplinary Due Process

The Second Circuit vacated the Southern District of New York's summary judgment for DOCCS officials in Joseph Vidal's Fourteenth Amendment procedural due process claim. The appellate court held that Vidal's 270-day disciplinary segregation sentence (180 days actually served in the Special Housing Unit) constitutes an atypical and significant hardship based on duration alone, triggering due process protections. The court rejected the lower court's conclusion that no liberty interest was implicated, finding instead that disciplinary segregation of this length inherently qualifies. The case was remanded for further proceedings consistent with the opinion.

Vidal v. Venettozzi - Prison Disciplinary Due Process

The Second Circuit vacated the SDNY judgment granting summary judgment to DOCCS officials and remanded, holding that Joseph Vidal's disciplinary segregation of 270 days imposed and 180 days served constitutes an atypical and significant hardship based on duration alone, triggering Fourteenth Amendment due process protections. The court found that prisoners facing extended SHU confinement have a protected liberty interest requiring basic procedural safeguards including the opportunity to call witnesses and present documentary evidence at disciplinary hearings. Defendants-appellees are DOCCS officials including Director Venettozzi, Hearing Officer Gutwein, Recreation Supervisor Carroll, and Disciplinary Office Assistant Anspach.

Vidal v. Venettozzi - Prison Disciplinary Due Process

The Second Circuit vacated the district court's summary judgment in favor of DOCCS officials, holding that Joseph Vidal's disciplinary segregation of 270 days imposed and 180 days served constitutes an atypical and significant hardship based on duration alone under Sandin v. Conner, 515 U.S. 472 (1995). The court found that this duration of segregation in the special housing unit implicates a protected liberty interest under the Fourteenth Amendment's due process clause, triggering procedural protections including the right to call witnesses and present evidence. The case is remanded for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.