Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. v. Andrx Pharmaceuticals, Inc.
District Court, S.D. Florida
1Opinion of the Court
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
HUCK, District Judge.
THIS MATTER is before the Court for a ruling on the issues presented during a bench trial held from April 26 to 30, 2004. In this patent infringement action, the crux of the Plaintiffs’ case relies on their suggestion that one of the ingredients, mi-crocrystalline cellulose, in the Defendants’ proposed medicinal tablet formulations can be divided into two portions, one portion of which functions actively as a binder and disintegrant and a second portion of which acts passively as a filler. The Court finds, largely on the ground that…
2Cases cited58 opinions
- Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1993
- Kumho Tire Co. v. CarmichaelSupreme Court of the United States · 1999
- MARKMAN Et Al. v. WESTVIEW INSTRUMENTS, INC., Et Al.Supreme Court of the United States · 1996
- Herbert Markman and Positek, Inc. v. Westview Instruments, Inc. And Althon Enterprises, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1995
- Vitronics Corporation v. Conceptronic, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1996
53 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Cedant v. United StatesDistrict Court, S.D. Florida · 2024
- Porras v. United StatesDistrict Court, M.D. Florida · 2022