Legal Opinion
In Re Actimmune Marketing Litigation
District Court, N.D. California
Decided April 28, 2009No. Master File C 08-02376-MHPPublishedCited by 15 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM & ORDER
MARILYN HALL PATEL, District Judge.
In this proposed nationwide class action, plaintiffs contend that defendants Inter Mune, Inc. (“InterMune”), W. Scott Harkonen (“Harkonen”) and Genentech, Inc. (“Genentech”) engaged in a fraudulent and deceptive scheme to market and sell the drug Actimmune® (interferon gamma-lb) Plaintiffs allege numerous causes of action pursuant to the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (“RICO”) 18 U.S.C., sections 1962(c)-(d); the California Business and Professions Code, sections 17200 et seq.; the California Civil Code, sections 1770 et…
2Cases cited46 opinions
- Bell Atlantic Corp. v. TwomblySupreme Court of the United States · 2007
- Conley v. GibsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1957
- Lujan v. Defenders of WildlifeSupreme Court of the United States · 1992
- Lopez v. SmithCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2000
- Papasan v. AllainSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
41 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by15 opinions
- In re Wellbutrin XL Antitrust LitigationDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 2009
- Pennsylvania Employee, Benefit Trust Fund v. Zeneca, Inc.District Court, D. Delaware · 2010
- Pat District Council 82 v. Takeda Pharmaceuticals CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2019
- United Food & Commercial Workers Local 1776 v. Teikoku Pharma USA, Inc.District Court, N.D. California · 2014
- Jarrett v. InterMune Inc.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2011
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.