APOTEX, INC. v. CEPHALON, INC. et al
Filing
982
MEMORANDUM OPINION ORDER THAT THE GENERIC DEFENDANTS' MOTION TO STRIKE (DOC. NO. #956 ), IS GRANTED, SUCH THAT PLAINTIFFS' MAY NOT ARGUE A PER SE THEORY OF LIABILITY BASED ON THE GENERIC DEFENDANTS' "KNOWLEDGE OF FRAUD" AT TRIAL. SIGNED BY HONORABLE MITCHELL S. GOLDBERG ON 12/14/2015. 12/14/2015 ENTERED AND COPIES MAILED AND E-MAILED.(amas)
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.
:
_________________________________________ :___________________________________
ORDER
AND NOW, this 14th day of December, 2015, upon consideration of the “Generic
Defendants’ Motion to Strike ‘Fraudulent Patent’ Theory from Plaintiffs’ Pretrial Memorandum”
(Dkt. No. 06-1797, Doc. No. 901; Dkt. No. 06-1833, Doc. No. 498; Dkt. No. 06-2768, Doc. No.
956), which I have construed as a motion to establish the legal standard that will govern
Plaintiffs’ claims against the Generic Defendants at trial, and the responses thereto, and for the
reasons set forth in the accompanying memorandum opinion, it is hereby ORDERED that the
1
Generic Defendants’ motion is GRANTED, such that Plaintiffs’ may not argue a per se theory
of liability based on the Generic Defendants’ “knowledge of fraud” at trial.
BY THE COURT:
/s/ Mitchell S. Goldberg
______________________________
Mitchell S. Goldberg, J.
2
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?