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

Weekly Digest
Fed. Cir.

Sanofi-Aventis v. Cobalt Pharm, No. 07-1522 (Fed. Cir. Nov. 9, 2009)

Affirmed
Court
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
Case No.
No. 07-1522
Decided
November 9, 2009
Judge
Rader, J.
Document
Order on Motion
Length
2 pages

NOTE: This order is nonprecedential.

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

2007-1522

SANOFI-AVENTIS, SANOFI-SYNTHELABO, INC., and

BRISTOL-MYERS SQUIBB SANOFI

PHARMACEUTICALS HOLDING PARTNERSHIP,

Plaintiffs-Appellees, Vv.

COBALT PHARMACEUTICALS, INC.,

Defendant-Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of

New York in case no. 05-CV-08055, Judge Sidney H. Stein.

ON MOTION

Before MAYER, CLEVENGER, and RADER, Circuit Judge.

Figure on page 1 of the opinion

ORDER

Sanofi-Aventis et al. (Sanofi) move for panel review and reconsideration pursuant to Fed. Cir. R. 27(I) of the court’s July 21, 2009 order denying Sanofi’s motion for issuance of the mandate. Cobalt Pharmaceuticals, Inc. responds and states that it “does not oppose, and hereby consents, to entry of judgment in this appeal in accordance with and based on this Court’s decision in Sanofi-Synthelabo v. Apotex Inc., 2007-1438, with each side to bear its own costs.”

This appeal was stayed pending the court's disposition of Sanofi v. Apotex, 2007-1438, in Apotex, the court afÏrmed the district court’s ruling that Sanofi’s patent was not invalid. Because the parties now agree that the judgment of the district court in this case should be summarily afÏrmed, the court grants the motion for reconsideration.

Figure on page 2 of the opinion
2Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED THAT:

(1) The motion for panel review is granted. (2) The motion for reconsideration is granted. The judgment of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York is summarily afÏrmed and the mandate is issued herewith.

(3) | Each side shall bear its own costs.

FOR THE COURT

NOV 0 9 2009 /s/ Jan Horbaly

Date Jan Horbaly

Clerk

ce: EvanR. Chesler, Esq.

William A. Rakoezy, Esq. UBT. Haay

E un arcree

er OR

$17

NOV 09 2009

ATE: NOV 0 9 2009

ISSUED AS A MAND

JAN HORBALY

CLERK

2007-1522 2

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

Sanofi-Aventis v. Cobalt Pharm, No. 07-1522 (Fed. Cir. Nov. 9, 2009).

Record ID
CAFC-07-1522-20091109
Permalink
https://patentcasewatch.com/opinions/CAFC-07-1522-20091109

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.