Legal Opinion
In re Rivastigimine Patent Litigation
District Court, S.D. New York
Decided November 22, 2006No. 05 MD 166(HB)PublishedCited by 2 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION & ORDER
BAER, District Judge.
Pursuant to 28. U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(A) (2006) and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72(a), plaintiffs Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation, Novartis AG, Novartis Pharma AG, Novartis International Pharmaceutical Ltd., and Proterra AG (collectively, “Novartis” or “Plaintiffs”) move this Court for reconsideration of portions of a discovery decision by Magistrate Judge James C. Francis IV, issued on August 8, 2006.
In that decision, Magistrate Francis granted in part the motion filed by defendants Dr. Reddy’s Laboratories, Ltd., Dr. Reddy’s Laboratories, Inc.,…
2Cases cited17 opinions
- United States v. United States Gypsum Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1948
- Thomas E. Hoar, Inc. v. Sara Lee Corp., Appeal of Greenspan, Jaffe & Rosenblatt, Leon J. Greenspan, Paul D. Jaffe and Victor E. RosenblattCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1990
- Gualandi v. AdamsCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2004
- Golden Trade v. Lee Apparel Co.District Court, S.D. New York · 1992
- American Stock Exchange, LLC v. Mopex, Inc.District Court, S.D. New York · 2002
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Panini America, Inc. v. Fanatics, Inc., Fanatics, LLC, Fanatics Collectibles Intermediate Holdco, Inc., Fanatics SPV, LLC, and Fanatics Holdings, Inc.District Court, S.D. New York · 2026
- Philips North America LLC v. Fitbit LLCDistrict Court, D. Massachusetts · 2022