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

Weekly Digest
Fed. Cir.

In re Sanofi, No. 09-M905 (Fed. Cir. July 10, 2009)

Denied
Court
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
Case No.
No. 09-M905
Decided
July 10, 2009
Judge
See opinion
Document
Order on Motion
Length
2 pages

NOTE: This order is nonprecedential.

Figure on page 1 of the opinion

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

MISCELLANEOUS DOCKET NO. 905

IN RE SANOFI-AVENTIS U.S. LLC, SANOFI-AVENTIS, and

DEBIOPHARM S.A.,

Petitioners.

On petition for writ of mandamus to the United States District Court for the District of

New Jersey in case no. 3:07-cv-2762, Judge Joel A. Pisano.

ON MOTION

Before MAYER, CLEVENGER, and RADER, Circuit Judges. MAYER Circuit Judge.

ORDER

Sanofi-Aventis U.S. LLC et al. petition for a writ of mandamus to direct the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey to vacate its judgment entered on June 30, 2009. Sandoz, Inc., Teva Parenteral Medicines, Inc. et al. (Teva), Mayne Pharma Limited et al. (Mayne), Barr Laboratories, Inc. et al. (Barr), and W.C. Heraeus GmbH oppose. Mustafa Nevzat Sanayii A.S. et al. and Sun Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd. take no position. Teva, Mayne, and Barr move for leave to file a reply to Sandoz's response with reply attached. Sanofi et al. move for leave to reply with reply attached.

Upon consideration thereof, IT IS ORDERED THAT:

The petition for a writ of mandamus is denied. Teva, Mayne, and Barr's motion for leave to file a reply is granted. (3)(cid:9) Sanofi et al.'s motion for leave to reply is granted.

Figure on page 2 of the opinion

2FOR THE COURT

JUL 1 02009

/s/ Jan Horbaly

(cid:9)

Date Jan Horbaly

Clerk

cc:(cid:9) Robert B. Wilson, Esq.

Dominick A. Conde, Esq.

FILED

James H. Hurst, Esq.

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR David M. Hashmall, Esq. THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT Dutch Chung, Esq.

JUL 1 0 2009 Patricia J. Thompson, Esq. Charles D. Ossola, Esq. Keith D. Parr, Esq. JAN HORBALY Gail J. Standish, Esq. CLERK Scott b. Feder, Esq. Steven Lieberman, Esq. Steven A. Maddox, Esq. Andrew M. Berdon, Esq. Daniel G. Brown, Esq. Steven H. Sklar, Esq. s19

Misc. 905(cid:9) -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

In re Sanofi, No. 09-M905 (Fed. Cir. July 10, 2009).

Record ID
CAFC-09-M905-20090710
Permalink
https://patentcasewatch.com/opinions/CAFC-09-M905-20090710

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.