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

Weekly Digest
Fed. Cir.

Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp v. apotex Inc, No. 12-1516 (Fed. Cir. June 10, 2013)

Affirmed
Court
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
Case No.
No. 12-1516
Decided
June 10, 2013
Judge
Per curiam (Rule 36)
Document
Rule 36 Judgment
Length
2 pages

NOTE: This disposition is nonprecedential. United States Court of Appeals

for the Federal Circuit

MERCK SHARP & DOHME CORP.,

Formerly known as Schering Corporation,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

v.

APOTEX INC. AND APOTEX CORP.,

Defendants-Cross Appellants.

2012-1516,-1543

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey in No. 09-CV-6373, Judge Peter G. Sheridan.

JUDGMENT

RICHARD L. STANLEY, Law Office of Richard Stanley, of Houston, Texas, argued for plaintiff-appellant. On the brief were PAUL D. MATUKAITIS, EDWARD W. MURRAY and MARY J. MORRY, Merick & Co. Inc., of Rahway, New Jersey; and NICOLAS G. BARZOUKAS, JOSHUA P. DAVIS, AUDREY L. MANESS and JUSTIN CONSTANT, Weil, Gotshal & Manges LLP, of Houston, Texas; and JOHN F. LYNCH, of Port Ludlow, Washington. Of counsel were JILLIAN A.

22 MERCK SHARP & DOHME CORP v. APOTEX INC CENTANNI, DAVID E. DELORENZI and SHEILA F. MCSHANE, of Gibbons, P.C., of Newark, NJ; and KEVIN S. KUDLAC, and RENER TREVIN, Weil, Gotshal & Manges LLP, of Houston, Texas.

DEANNE M. MAZZOCHI, Rakoczy Molino Mazzochi Siwik LLP, of Chicago, Illinois, argued for defendants-cross appellants. With him on the brief were WILLIAM A. RAKOCZY, PAUL J. MOLINOM, ANDREW M. ALUL, ROY CHAMCHARAS, MATTHEW V. ANDERSON and YIXIN H. TANG. Of counsel was ARNOLD B. CALMANN, Saiber LLC, of Newark, New Jersey

THIS CAUSE having been heard and considered, it is ORDERED and ADJUDGED:

Judges).

AFFIRMED. See Fed. Cir. R. 36.

ENTERED BY ORDER OF THE COURT

June 10, 2013 /s/ Jan Horbaly Date Jan Horbaly Clerk ]

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

Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp v. apotex Inc, No. 12-1516 (Fed. Cir. June 10, 2013).

govinfo ID
USCOURTS-ca13-12-01516-0
Permalink
https://patentcasewatch.com/opinions/USCOURTS-ca13-12-01516-0

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.