---
title: "David Vachon | Medical Technology Expert Witness | Deep Research and Background Information on Experts"
meta:
  "og:description": "David John Vachon is an expert witness in Medical Technology. View detailed background information and comprehensive legal research data."
  "og:title": "Experts | Expert Witness Profiler | Deep Research and Background Information on Experts"
  description: "David John Vachon is an expert witness in Medical Technology. View detailed background information and comprehensive legal research data."
---

### **Results for: ** David John Vachon

# **David John Vachon**

Medical Technology

Spokane, Washington

![money_back](https://expertwitnessprofiler.com/expert-witness/David-Vachon/1519514/img/moneyback.webp)

If you're not satisfied, we don't expect you to pay.

That's our commitment and your guarantee. Simply ask for a refund.

***Disclaimer***

We are an independent data provider, compiling expert witness information from court websites, public records, and third-party sources. We do not employ, endorse, or have any affiliation with the experts profiled. This page is not a means to contact the expert directly.

Expert Details

**Dr. David John Vachon Ph.D.** is an expert witness in the field of **Medical Technology**. Some of the cases where David Vachon has been retained as an expert witness are **In The Inter Partes Review Of U.S. Patent No. 7,146,202; Wilson, Et Al V. Siemens Pacesetter, Et Al; Pacesetter Inc. V. Surmodics Inc.**.  Dr. David John Vachon Ph.D. has been involved in cases related to Products Liability, Intellectual Property, Contracts etc. in the past. These cases have been in front of judges such as Sandra S. Beckwith, Ronald S.W. Lew, Not Mentioned in U.S. District Court For The Central District Of California, U.S. District - Ohio Southern, United States Patent And Trademark Office.  This is only a representative list of cases where David Vachon has been involved and more information is available in our Expert Witness Profiles and Expert Challenge Study. These include details about whether the testimony was challenged or not, which party retained the expert, who were the attorneys representing the parties in the case.