Legal Opinion
Enzo Therapeutics, Inc. v. Yeda Research & Development Co.
District Court, E.D. Virginia
Decided February 28, 2007No. Civil Action 2:06cv377PublishedCited by 2 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION AND ORDER
DOUMAR, District Judge.
Now before the Court is a Motion for Summary Judgment by which Plaintiff Enzo Therapeutics, Inc. (“Enzo”), seeks early resolution of an Interference appeal filed pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 146. Defendant Yeda Research and Development Co. (“Yeda”) objects to summary judgment and maintains that material facts remain in dispute that foreclose the premature termination or remand of this case to the Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences (“Board”) at the United States Patent and Trademark Office (“PTO”). For the reasons stated herein, the Court GRANTS Enzo’s…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, Administratrix of the Estate of CatrettSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd. v. Zenith Radio CorporationSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Continental Can Company Usa, Inc. And Continental Pet Technologies, Inc. v. Monsanto Company, Hoover Universal, Inc. And Johnson Controls, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1991
- United States v. Robert E. LeeCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1991
- Smith v. Carter Carburetor CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1942
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Aristocrat Technologies Australia PTY Ltd. v. International Game Technology and IGTDistrict Court, N.D. California · 2007
- Human Genome Sciences, Inc. v. Amgen, Inc.District Court, D. Delaware · 2008