72 Cited authorities

  1. Ashcroft v. Iqbal

    556 U.S. 662 (2009)   Cited 261,602 times   281 Legal Analyses
    Holding court need not credit "mere conclusory statements" in complaint
  2. Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly

    550 U.S. 544 (2007)   Cited 274,949 times   368 Legal Analyses
    Holding that allegations of conduct that are merely consistent with wrongdoing do not state a claim unless "placed in a context that raises a suggestion of" such wrongdoing
  3. Ebay Inc. v. Mercexchange, L. L. C.

    547 U.S. 388 (2006)   Cited 3,921 times   133 Legal Analyses
    Holding that traditional four-factor test applies to injunctions against patent infringement
  4. Associated General Contractors v. Carpenters

    459 U.S. 519 (1983)   Cited 5,150 times   34 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a union lacked standing to sue for injuries passed on to it by intermediaries
  5. Christianson v. Colt Indus. Operating Corp.

    486 U.S. 800 (1988)   Cited 3,178 times   21 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the appeal belonged before the regional circuit because the claims did not arise under patent law
  6. Whitmore v. Arkansas

    495 U.S. 149 (1990)   Cited 2,914 times   16 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a third party does not have "standing to challenge the validity of a death sentence imposed on a capital defendant who has elected to forgo his right of appeal"
  7. Holmes Grp., v. Vornado Air Circulation Sys., Inc.

    535 U.S. 826 (2002)   Cited 1,425 times   4 Legal Analyses
    Holding that "`[l]inguistic consistency'" required that the same "arising under" test be applied to the jurisdictional statute for patent claims, 28 U.S.C. § 1338, as is used for the general federal jurisdiction statute, 28 U.S.C. § 1331
  8. Christiansburg Garment Co. v. Equal Emp't Opportunity Comm'n

    434 U.S. 412 (1978)   Cited 3,687 times   33 Legal Analyses
    Holding that for a defendant to recoup attorneys fees under § 706(k) of Title VII, a court must find that the plaintiff litigated his or her claim beyond the point where it became “frivolous, unreasonable, or groundless” or where plaintiff acted in bad faith
  9. Phillips v. AWH Corp.

    415 F.3d 1303 (Fed. Cir. 2005)   Cited 5,788 times   164 Legal Analyses
    Holding that "because extrinsic evidence can help educate the court regarding the field of the invention and can help the court determine what a person of ordinary skill in the art would understand claim terms to mean, it is permissible for the district court in its sound discretion to admit and use such evidence"
  10. Brunswick Corp. v. Pueblo Bowl-O-Mat, Inc.

    429 U.S. 477 (1977)   Cited 2,085 times   20 Legal Analyses
    Holding that mere economic loss does not amount to an antitrust injury under the antitrust laws
  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 355,868 times   945 Legal Analyses
    Granting the court discretion to exclude matters outside the pleadings presented to the court in defense of a motion to dismiss
  12. Section 271 - Infringement of patent

    35 U.S.C. § 271   Cited 6,124 times   1080 Legal Analyses
    Holding that testing is a "use"
  13. Section 15 - Suits by persons injured

    15 U.S.C. § 15   Cited 5,732 times   35 Legal Analyses
    Granting private right of action to anyone who has been injured "by reason of anything forbidden in the antitrust laws ..."
  14. Section 2 - Monopolizing trade a felony; penalty

    15 U.S.C. § 2   Cited 4,443 times   31 Legal Analyses
    In § 2 cases under the Sherman Act, as in § 7 cases under the Clayton Act (Brown Shoe Co. v. United States, 370 U.S. 294, 325) there may be submarkets that are separate economic entities.
  15. Section 1 - Trusts, etc., in restraint of trade illegal; penalty

    15 U.S.C. § 1   Cited 3,184 times   72 Legal Analyses
    Forbidding every "contract, combination . . . or conspiracy, in restraint of trade or commerce among the several States"
  16. Section 355 - New drugs

    21 U.S.C. § 355   Cited 2,263 times   351 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 284 - Damages

    35 U.S.C. § 284   Cited 2,109 times   197 Legal Analyses
    Granting "interest and costs as fixed by the court"
  18. Section 331 - Prohibited acts

    21 U.S.C. § 331   Cited 1,529 times   108 Legal Analyses
    Prohibiting the sale of adulterated foods
  19. Section 355a - Pediatric studies of drugs

    21 U.S.C. § 355a   Cited 68 times   12 Legal Analyses

    (a) Definitions As used in this section, the term "pediatric studies" or "studies" means at least one clinical investigation (that, at the Secretary's discretion, may include pharmacokinetic studies) in pediatric age groups (including neonates in appropriate cases) in which a drug is anticipated to be used, and, at the discretion of the Secretary, may include preclinical studies. (b) Market exclusivity for new drugs (1) In general Except as provided in paragraph (2), if, prior to approval of an application

  20. Section 314.53 - Submission of patent information

    21 C.F.R. § 314.53   Cited 93 times   55 Legal Analyses
    Referring to "those patents that claim the drug product," and those "patents that claim the drug substance"