Legal Opinion

UCB, Inc. v. Yeda Research & Development Co.

District Court, E.D. Virginia

Decided July 30, 2015No. 1:14cv1038(LMB/TCB)PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

MEMORANDUM OPINION

LEONIE M. BRINKEMA, District Judge.

Plaintiff/Counterclaim-Defendant UCB, Inc. (“UCB”) brought this declaratory judgment action seeking a declaration that its Cimzia® product, a humanized monoclonal antibody approved by the Food and Drug Administration- (“FDA”) for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis, psoriatic . arthritis, active ankylosing -spondylitis, and Crohn’s disease, does not infringe defendant’s patent and that the patent is invalid. Specifically, UCB argues that the defendant’s patent does not cover humanized .monoclonal antibodies like Cimzia®,…

2Cases cited43 opinions

  1. Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1986
  2. MARKMAN Et Al. v. WESTVIEW INSTRUMENTS, INC., Et Al.Supreme Court of the United States · 1996
  3. Edward H. Phillips v. Awh Corporation, Hopeman Brothers, Inc., and Lofton Corporation, Defendants-CrossCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2006
  4. Vitronics Corporation v. Conceptronic, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1996
  5. Warner-Jenkinson Co. v. Hilton Davis Chemical Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1997

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

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. UCB, Inc. v. Yeda Research & Development Co.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2016
  2. Agilent Technologies, Inc. v. Axion Biosystems, Inc.District Court, D. Delaware · 2025
  3. Maquet Cardiovascular LLC v. Abiomed Inc.District Court, D. Massachusetts · 2022
  4. Oralic Supplies Inc. v. HuangDistrict Court, E.D. Virginia · 2024

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

Powered by the Exa API