Patent opinions from the Eastern District of Texas and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

Weekly Digest
Fed. Cir.

Synthon IP v. Pfizer, No. 07-1344 (Fed. Cir. June 17, 2008)

Affirmed
Court
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
Case No.
No. 07-1344
Decided
June 17, 2008
Judge
Per curiam
Document
Nonprecedential Opinion
Length
2 pages

NOTE: This disposition is nonprecedential.

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

2007-1344

SYNTHON IP, INC.,

Plaintiff-Appellant, v.

PFIZER, INC.,

Defendant-Appellee.

Nichole W. Stafford, Wilson Sonsini, Goodrich & Rosati, PC, of Austin, Texas, argued for plaintiff-appellant. On the brief were Jonathan G. Graves and John P. Moy, Cooley Godward Kronish LLP, of Reston, Virginia; Michael A. Ladra and Terry Kearney, Wilson, Sonsini, Goodrich & Rosati, PC, of Palo Alto, California; Of counsel was Nathan K. Cummings, Cooley Godward Kronish LLP, of Reston, Virginia. Jack B. Blumenfield, Morris, Nichols, Arsht & Tunnell, LLP, of Wilmington, Delaware, argued for defendant-appellee. With him on the brief were Maryellen Noreika, and James W. Parrett, Jr. Of counsel was John F. Anderson, Troutman Sanders LLP, of McLean, Virginia; and Derek J. Fahnestock, Morris, Nichols, Arsht & Tunnell, LLP, of Wilmigton. Appealed from: United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia Judge Thomas Selby Ellis, III

2NOTE: This disposition is nonprecedential.

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

2007-1344

SYNTHON IP, INC.,

Plaintiff-Appellant, v.

PFIZER, INC.,

Defendant-Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia in case

no. 1:05-CV-1267, Judge Thomas Selby Ellis, III.

DECIDED: June 17, 2008

Before MAYER, Circuit Judge, PLAGER, Senior Circuit Judge and DYK, Circuit Judge.

The court, having considered the submissions and oral arguments of the parties, and having considered the record before and judgment of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, holds that the findings of inequitable conduct and exceptional case, and the award of attorney fees are affirmed. Under these circumstances, we need not reach the issues of infringement and validity.

Text extracted from the official PDF and reflowed for reading. It is not a certified transcript — the PDF linked above is the authoritative document.

Analysis is coming soon.

A plain-English account of the issues, facts and holding, written by Patent Case Watch. The opinion itself — its full text, its PDF and everything else on this page — stays free to read for everyone, always.

Cite this opinion

Synthon IP v. Pfizer, No. 07-1344 (Fed. Cir. June 17, 2008).

Record ID
CAFC-07-1344-20080617
Permalink
https://patentcasewatch.com/opinions/CAFC-07-1344-20080617

No reporter citation is shown because the official source does not supply one; none is inferred here. Check the opinion and a citator before relying on this form.