AMERISOURCEBERGEN CORPORATION V DIALYSIST WEST, INC.
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
AMERISOURCEBERGEN CORPORATION, a New Jersey corporation, dba Bergen Brunswig Corporation, aka BBC; AMERISOURCEBERGEN DRUG CORPORATION; MEDICAL INITIATIVES, INC., aka Oncology Supply; ASD SPECIALTY HEALTHCARE, INC., Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. DIALYSIST WEST, INC., an Arizona corporation, Defendant-Appellee, v. AMERX INC., a Florida corporation; CSG DISTRIBUTORS, a Tennessee company; PREMIER MEDICAL DISTRIBUTORS, INC., Third-party-Defendants.
No. 04-15595 D.C. No. CV-02-01472-JWS District of Arizona, Phoenix ORDER AMENDING OPINION
Filed April 24, 2006 Before: Jerome Farris, A. Wallace Tashima, and Consuelo M. Callahan, Circuit Judges.
ORDER The opinion filed on March 22, 2006 is amended as follows: on slip opinion page 3046, lines 10-16, the following sentences are deleted: "AmerisourceBergen contends, however that the contracts for sale of Epogen and other drugs
AMERISOURCEBERGEN v. DIALYSIST WEST
were not separate contracts. Because the Vendor Agreement signed by Dialysist West permits AmerisourceBergen to return any goods to Dialysist West for "full credit," AmerisourceBergen believes it was justified in applying the credit it held for the counterfeit Epogen purchases against its outstanding debts." The following sentences are added on slip opinion page 3046, at line 10: "AmerisourceBergen concedes that the contracts for sale of Epogen and the other drugs were separate contracts. But because the Vendor Agreement signed by Dialysist West permits AmerisourceBergen to return any goods to Dialysist West for "full credit," AmerisourceBergen believes it was justified in applying the credit it held for the counterfeit Epogen purchases against its outstanding debts."
PRINTED FOR ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE--U.S. COURTS BY THOMSON/WEST--SAN FRANCISCO The summary, which does not constitute a part of the opinion of the court, is copyrighted © 2006 Thomson/West.
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?