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

Weekly Digest
Fed. Cir.

Palmetto Pharmaceuticals LLC v. AstraZeneca Pharmaceuticals, No. 16-1455 (Fed. Cir. Dec. 9, 2016)

Affirmed
Court
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
Case No.
No. 16-1455
Also Docketed
No. 16-1501 (consolidated; same document)
Decided
December 9, 2016
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NOTE: This disposition is nonprecedential.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 PALMETTO PHARMACEUTICALS LLC,

Plaintiff-Appellant

v.

ASTRAZENECA PHARMACEUTICALS LP,

Defendant-Cross-Appellant

2016-1455, 2016-1501

Appeals from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina in No. 2:11-cv-00807-SB, Senior Judge Solomon Blatt, Jr.

JUDGMENT

JOHN PAUL ISACSON, Perkins Coie, LLP, Washington, DC, argued for plaintiff-appellant. Also represented BY COLIN GENE SANDERCOCK; DAVID J. HARTH, DAVID R. PEKAREK KROHN, JOHN SINGLETON SKILTON, Madison, WI; DAN L. BAGATELL, Hanover, NH.

CHRISTOPHER NEIL SIPES, Covington & Burling LLP, Washington, DC, argued for defendant-cross-appellant. Also represented by STEPHEN PIERCE ANTHONY, ISAAC CHAIM BELFER, ROBERT JASON FOWLER.

2THIS CAUSE having been heard and considered, it is ORDERED and ADJUDGED:

Judges).

AFFIRMED. See Fed. Cir. R. 36.

ENTERED BY ORDER OF THE COURT December 9, 2016 /s/ Peter R. Marksteiner Date Peter R. Marksteiner Clerk of Court

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

Palmetto Pharmaceuticals LLC v. AstraZeneca Pharmaceuticals, No. 16-1455 (Fed. Cir. Dec. 9, 2016).

govinfo ID
USCOURTS-ca13-16-01455-0
Permalink
https://patentcasewatch.com/opinions/USCOURTS-ca13-16-01455-0

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.