From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Apotex Inc. v. Cephalon, Inc.

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
Apr 8, 2013
500 F. App'x 959 (Fed. Cir. 2013)

Opinion

2012-1417

04-08-2013

APOTEX INC., Plaintiff-Appellee, v. CEPHALON, INC., Defendant-Appellant, AND BARR LABORATORIES, INC., MYLAN LABORATORIES, INC., TEVA PHARMACEUTICAL INDUSTRIES, LTD., TEVA PHARMACEUTICALS USA, INC., RANBAXY LABORATORIES, LTD., AND RANBAXY PHARMACEUTICALS, INC., Defendants.

ROBERT B. BREISBLATT, Katten Muchin Rosenman, LLP, of Chicago, Illinois, argued for plaintiff-appellee. With him on the brief were BRIAN J. SODIKOFF, MARTIN S. MASAR, III and CHRISTINE E. BESTOR; HOWARD R. RUBIN and CHRISTOPHER D. JACKSON, of Washington, DC. WILLIAM F. LEE, Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr, LLP, of Boston, Massachusetts, argued for defendant-appellant. With him on the brief were MARK C. FLEMING, GREGORY P. TERAN, DANIEL M. ESRICK, and ANDREW J. DANFORD; WILLIAM G. MCELWAIN, and CAROLYN JACOBS CHACHKIN, of Washington, DC; ROBERT J. GUNTHER, JR. and OMAR KHAN, of New York, New York.


NOTE: This disposition is nonprecedential.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania in No. 06-CV-2768, Judge Mitchell S. Goldberg.

ROBERT B. BREISBLATT, Katten Muchin Rosenman, LLP, of Chicago, Illinois, argued for plaintiff-appellee. With him on the brief were BRIAN J. SODIKOFF, MARTIN S. MASAR, III and CHRISTINE E. BESTOR; HOWARD R. RUBIN and CHRISTOPHER D. JACKSON, of Washington, DC.

WILLIAM F. LEE, Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr, LLP, of Boston, Massachusetts, argued for defendant-appellant. With him on the brief were MARK C. FLEMING, GREGORY P. TERAN, DANIEL M. ESRICK, and ANDREW J. DANFORD; WILLIAM G. MCELWAIN, and CAROLYN JACOBS CHACHKIN, of Washington, DC; ROBERT J. GUNTHER, JR. and OMAR KHAN, of New York, New York.

Before RADER, Chief Judge, LOURIE, and O'MALLEY,

Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

We affirm the trial court's judgments of invalidity and unenforceability with respect to Cephalon, Inc.'s ("Cephalon") U.S. Reissue Patent No. 37,516. We do so with the understanding that the court's inequitable conduct finding was based on the conduct of Dr. Peter Grebow and Mr. Richard Burgoon, while acting within the course and scope of their employment or as officers and/or employees of Cephalon. No pleading asserted that Mr. Paul T. Clark committed inequitable conduct, and we do not read the opinion below as finding that he personally committed inequitable conduct.

AFFIRMED


Summaries of

Apotex Inc. v. Cephalon, Inc.

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
Apr 8, 2013
500 F. App'x 959 (Fed. Cir. 2013)
Case details for

Apotex Inc. v. Cephalon, Inc.

Case Details

Full title:APOTEX INC., Plaintiff-Appellee, v. CEPHALON, INC., Defendant-Appellant…

Court:United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

Date published: Apr 8, 2013

Citations

500 F. App'x 959 (Fed. Cir. 2013)

Citing Cases

King Drug Co. of Florence, Inc. v. Cephalon, Inc.

The generic defendants are Barr Pharmaceuticals, Mylan Laboratories, Inc., Teva Pharmaceuticals, Ltd., Teva…

Fed. Trade Comm'n v. Cephalon, Inc.

Id. at *27. This ruling was subsequently affirmed by the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal…