KING DRUG COMPANY OF FLORENCE, INC vs. CEPHALON, INC., ET AL
Filing
737
ORDER THAT DEFENDANTS CEPHALON, BARR AND TEVA'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT ON PLAINTIFF'S CHALLENGES TO THE SETTLEMENT AGREEMENTS IS DENIED. MOTION OF THE MYLAN DEFENDANTS ON ALL CLAIMS UNDER FTC VS ACTAVIS IS DENIED.RANBAXY DEFENDANTS MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT IS DENIED; ETC.. SIGNED BY HONORABLE MITCHELL S. GOLDBERG ON 1/28/15. 1/28/15 ENTERED AND COPIES MAILED, E-MAILED.(jl, )
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
______________________________________________________________________________
:
KING DRUG COMPANY OF FLORENCE, INC., :
CIVIL ACTION
et al.,
:
Plaintiffs,
:
:
v.
:
No. 2:06-cv-1797
:
CEPHALON, INC., et al.,
:
Defendants.
:
_________________________________________ :__________________________________
:
VISTA HEALTHPLAN, INC., et al.,
:
CIVIL ACTION
Plaintiffs,
:
:
v.
:
No. 2:06-cv-1833
:
CEPHALON, INC., et al.,
:
Defendants.
:
_________________________________________ :__________________________________
:
APOTEX, INC.,
:
CIVIL ACTION
Plaintiff,
:
:
v.
:
No. 2:06-cv-2768
:
CEPHALON, INC., et al.,
:
Defendants.
:
_________________________________________ :___________________________________
:
FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION,
:
CIVIL ACTION
Plaintiff,
:
:
v.
:
No. 2:08-cv-2141
:
CEPHALON, INC.,
:
Defendant.
:
_________________________________________ :__________________________________
ORDER
AND NOW, this 28th day of January, 2015, upon consideration of “Defendants
Cephalon, Barr, and Teva’s Motion for Summary Judgment on Plaintiffs’ Challenges to the
Settlement Agreements” (Dkt. No. 06-1797, Doc. No. 626; Dkt. No. 06-1833, Doc. No. 307;
Dkt. No. 06-2768, Doc. No. 710; Dkt. No. 08-2141, Doc. No. 275), “Motion of the Mylan
Defendants’ for Summary Judgment on All Claims Under FTC v. Actavis” (Dkt. No. 06-1797,
Doc. No. 612; Dkt. No. 06-1833, Doc. No. 295; Dkt. No. 06-2768, Doc. No. 690), and “Ranbaxy
Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment” (Dkt. No. 06-1797, Doc. No. 621; Dkt. No. 061833, Doc. No. 302; Dkt. No. 06-2768, Doc. No. 702), and following oral argument, and for the
reasons stated in the accompanying memorandum opinion, it is hereby ORDERED that these
motions are DENIED.
BY THE COURT:
/s/ Mitchell S. Goldberg
______________________________
Mitchell S. Goldberg, J.
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?