Legal Opinion

Smithkline Beecham Corp. v. Apotex Corp.

District Court, N.D. Illinois

Decided May 26, 2000No. 98 C 3952PublishedCited by 25 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

MEMORANDUM ORDER

BOBRICK, United States Magistrate Judge.

Before the court is the motion of defendants Apotex Corporation, Apotex Inc., and Torpharm, Inc. to compel the production of certain documents listed in the privilege log of plaintiffs Smithkline Beecham Corporation and Beecham Group, Inc.

I. BACKGROUND

This case concerns the anti-depressant pharmaceutical that plaintiffs market as “Paxil.” Beecham obtained United States Patent No. 4,721,723 on the drug Crystalline Paroxetine Hydrochloride Hemihydrate on January 26, 1988 (“723 Patent”), and eventually assigned it to Smithkline.1 Defendant…

2Cases cited24 opinions

  1. Upjohn Co. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1981
  2. United States v. NoblesSupreme Court of the United States · 1975
  3. Sperry v. Florida Ex Rel. Florida BarSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
  4. Duplan Corporation v. Deering Milliken, Inc.District Court, D. South Carolina · 1974
  5. United States v. Jesse J. EvansCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1997

19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by25 opinions

  1. Federal Trade Commission v. GlaxoSmithKlineCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 2002
  2. SmithKline Beecham Corp. v. Apotex Corp.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 2005
  3. In re Sulfuric Acid Antitrust LitigationDistrict Court, N.D. Illinois · 2006
  4. Evergreen Trading, LLC ex rel. GN Investments, LLC v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2007
  5. In re Rivastigmine Patent LitigationDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 2006

20 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API