§Why CasetextPricing

Federal Trade Commission v. Cephalon, Inc.

Memorandum in Opposition re MOTION to Dismiss the First Amended Complaint

79 Cited authorities

  1. Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly

    550 U.S. 544 (2007)   Cited 268,629 times   366 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a complaint's allegations should "contain sufficient factual matter, accepted as true, to 'state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face' "

  2. Ebay Inc. v. Mercexchange, L. L. C.

    547 U.S. 388 (2006)   Cited 3,821 times   130 Legal Analyses
    Holding that traditional four-factor test applies to injunctions against patent infringement

  3. Markman v. Westview Instruments, Inc.

    517 U.S. 370 (1996)   Cited 5,366 times   65 Legal Analyses
    Holding that claim construction is a matter of law for the court

  4. Medimmune, Inc. v. GenenTech, Inc.

    549 U.S. 118 (2007)   Cited 2,556 times   90 Legal Analyses
    Holding "the phrase 'case of actual controversy' in the Act refers to the types of 'Cases' and 'Controversies' that are justiciable under Article III"

  5. Phillips v. County of Allegheny

    515 F.3d 224 (3d Cir. 2008)   Cited 16,924 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a district court need not permit a curative amendment if such amendment would be futile

  6. Fowler v. UPMC Shadyside

    578 F.3d 203 (3d Cir. 2009)   Cited 14,153 times   4 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the district court did not abuse its discretion "in denying a motion for a class action determination which was untimely under the local rule"

  7. KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc.

    550 U.S. 398 (2007)   Cited 1,523 times   180 Legal Analyses
    Holding that, in an obviousness analysis, "[r]igid preventative rules that deny factfinders recourse to common sense, however, are neither necessary under our case law nor consistent with it"

  8. Christianson v. Colt Indus. Operating Corp.

    486 U.S. 800 (1988)   Cited 3,140 times   21 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the appeal belonged before the regional circuit because the claims did not arise under patent law

  9. United States v. Gypsum Co.

    333 U.S. 364 (1948)   Cited 10,475 times   7 Legal Analyses
    Holding that oral testimony in conflict with contemporaneous documentary evidence deserves little weight

  10. Professional Real Estate Investors, Inc. v. Columbia Pictures Industries, Inc.

    508 U.S. 49 (1993)   Cited 1,137 times   42 Legal Analyses
    Holding litigants immune from an antitrust claim under Noerr-Pennington immunity

  11. Rule 12 - Defenses and Objections: When and How Presented; Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings; Consolidating Motions; Waiving Defenses; Pretrial Hearing

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 12   Cited 348,148 times   927 Legal Analyses
    Granting the court discretion to exclude matters outside the pleadings presented to the court in defense of a motion to dismiss

  12. Rule 56 - Summary Judgment

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 56   Cited 329,861 times   158 Legal Analyses
    Holding a party may move for summary judgment on any part of any claim or defense in the lawsuit

  13. Rule 201 - Judicial Notice of Adjudicative Facts

    Fed. R. Evid. 201   Cited 28,507 times   26 Legal Analyses
    Holding "[n]ormally, in deciding a motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim, courts must limit their inquiry to the facts stated in the complaint and the documents either attached to or incorporated in the complaint. However, courts may also consider matters of which they may take judicial notice."

  14. Rule 50 - Judgment as a Matter of Law in a Jury Trial; Related Motion for a New Trial; Conditional Ruling

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 50   Cited 13,644 times   62 Legal Analyses
    Allowing "renewed motion"

  15. Section 1295 - Jurisdiction of the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

    28 U.S.C. § 1295   Cited 8,334 times   92 Legal Analyses
    Granting jurisdiction to the Federal Circuit over cases arising from executive agency board of contract appeals

  16. Section 355 - New drugs

    21 U.S.C. § 355   Cited 2,252 times   340 Legal Analyses
    Granting the court discretion to change the date on which an ANDA may be approved if "either party to the action failed to reasonably cooperate in expediting the action"

  17. Section 154 - Contents and term of patent; provisional rights

    35 U.S.C. § 154   Cited 762 times   258 Legal Analyses
    Granting twenty years for utility patents

  18. Section 314.107 - Date of approval of a 505(b)(2) application or ANDA

    21 C.F.R. § 314.107   Cited 67 times   13 Legal Analyses
    Expanding Paragraph IV certification to include "unenforceability" defense in addition to the invalidity and noninfringement defenses stated in 21 U.S.C. § 355(j), because unenforceability is a recognized reason why a generic drug product would not violate a patent holder's rights