Legal Opinion
Schering Corp. v. Vitarine Pharmaceuticals, Inc.
District Court, D. New Jersey
Decided March 10, 1989No. Civ. A. No. 88-4046PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
BARRY, District Judge.
On September 16,1988, counsel for plaintiffs Schering Corporation and Key Pharmaceuticals and counsel for defendants Vitarme Pharmaceuticals and Major Pharmaceuticals appeared in my chambers on plaintiffs’ application for an order to show cause. Plaintiffs’ complaint sought, inter alia, injunctive relief as to two claims: first, advertisements falsely claiming that Murray Drug Corporation’s 100 and 200 mg. Inwood theophylline was bioequivalent to plaintiffs’ Theodur theophylline1 and, second, the “billboarding,” in Murray’s advertisements, of the Theodur name and…
2Cases cited36 opinions
- White v. New Hampshire Department of Employment SecuritySupreme Court of the United States · 1982
- Samuel "Wesley" McCabe and John Elson v. General Foods Corporation, Alan Moltz, Abner Ladson and Does 1-100Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1987
- Szabo Food Service, Inc. v. Canteen CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1987
- American Farm Lines v. Black Ball Freight ServiceSupreme Court of the United States · 1970
- Ecri, a Nonprofit Pennsylvania Corporation v. McGraw Inc., McGraw Information Systems Co., and McGraw Book Co.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1987
31 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Schering Corp. v. Vitarine Pharmaceuticals, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1989
- Philadelphia Reserve Supply Co. v. Nowalk & Associates, Inc.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1994
- Schering Corporation and Key Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. Vitarine Pharmaceuticals, Inc. And Major Pharmaceuticals Corp. Appeal of Milgrim Thomajan & Lee P.C., Alfred T. Lee and Samuel D. Rosen, in No. 89-5309. Schering Corporation and Key Pharmaceuticals, Inc., in No. 89-5310. v. Vitarine Pharmaceuticals, Inc. And Major Pharmaceuticals CorpCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1989