Opinion · United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

IN RE OMEPRAZOLE PATENT LITIGATION, 412 Fed.Appx. 297 (Fed. Cir. 2010)

In re OMEPRAZOLE Pat. LITIGATION. Astrazeneca AB, Aktiebolaget Hassle,KBI-E, Inc., KBI, Inc., & Astrazeneca LP, Plaintiffs-Appellees, v.Mylan Laboratories Inc. (now known as Mylan Inc.), Mylan PharmaceuticalsInc., Laboratories Dr. Esteve, S.A. & Esteve Quimica, S.A.,Defendants-Appellants., 412 F. App'x 297 (Fed. Cir. 2010)

Type
Opinion
Court
United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
Jurisdiction
Federal
Date
2011-03-08
Topic
general

IN RE OMEPRAZOLE PATENT LITIGATION, 412 Fed.Appx. 297 (Fed. Cir. 2010) In re OMEPRAZOLE PATENT LITIGATION. Astrazeneca AB, Aktiebolaget Hassle,KBI-E, Inc., KBI, Inc., and Astrazeneca LP, Plaintiffs-Appellees, v.Mylan Laboratories Inc. (now known as Mylan Inc.), Mylan PharmaceuticalsInc., Laboratories Dr. Esteve, S.A. and Esteve Quimica, S.A.,Defendants-Appellants.

Citator

UpLaw has not yet analyzed IN RE OMEPRAZOLE PATENT LITIGATION, 412 Fed.Appx. 297 (Fed. Cir. 2010). The absence of a flag is not a finding that it is good law.

IN RE OMEPRAZOLE PATENT LITIGATION,412 Fed.Appx. 297(Fed. Cir. 2010)
In re OMEPRAZOLE PATENT LITIGATION. Astrazeneca AB, Aktiebolaget Hassle,
KBI-E, Inc., KBI, Inc., and Astrazeneca LP, Plaintiffs-Appellees, v.
Mylan Laboratories Inc. (now known as Mylan Inc.), Mylan Pharmaceuticals
Inc., Laboratories Dr. Esteve, S.A. and Esteve Quimica, S.A.,
Defendants-Appellants.
No. 2010-1414.
United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit.
March 8, 2011.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York in Nos. 00-CV-6749, 03-CV-6057, M-21-81, and MDL no. 1291, Judge Barbara S. Jones.
Errol B. Taylor, Milbank, Tweed, Hadley McCloy LLP, of New York, NY, argued for plaintiffs-appellees. With him on the brief were Fredrick M. Zullow, John M. Griem, Jr., and Christopher J. Gaspar.

James H. Wallace, Jr., Wiley Rein, LLP, of Washington, DC, argued for defendants-appellants. With him on the brief were Mark A. Pacella and Brian H. Pandya.
Before RADER, Chief Judge, MOORE and O'MALLEY, Circuit Judges.
JUDGMENT
PER CURIAM.
THIS CAUSE having been heard and considered, it is

ORDERED and ADJUDGED:AFFIRMED.SeeFed. Cir. R. 36.
  1. [EDITOR'S NOTE: This case is unpublished as indicated by the issuing court.] ↩