Celgene Corp. v. Teva Pharms, USA, Inc.
District Court, D. New Jersey
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
CHESLER, District Judge.
I. INTRODUCTION
In this Hatch-Waxman Act patent infringement case, defendant Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc. (“Teva”) moves pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(c) for judgement on the pleadings with respect to plaintiffs Celgene Corporation, Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation, and Novartis Pharma AG’s (collectively “plaintiffs”) allegation of willful infringement. For the reasons that follow, Teva’s motion is GRANTED.
II. BACKGROUND
A. The Hatch-Waxman Act
The Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, 21 U.S.C. §§ 301-99, (“FDCA”) provides that a company seeking to…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Hishon v. King & SpaldingSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
- Gomez v. ToledoSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
- Eli Lilly & Co. v. Medtronic, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1990
- Robb, James v. City of Philadelphia and Mann, Fredric R. And Horowitz, Vladimir and Crawford, Robert W. And Washington, Nathaniel and Doe, JohnCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1984
- Rosemount, Inc., Appellee/cross-Appellant v. Beckman Instruments, Inc., Appellant/cross-AppelleeCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1984
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Wyeth v. RANBAXY LABORATORIES LIMITEDDistrict Court, D. New Jersey · 2006
- BORNSTEIN v. MCMASTER-CARR SUPPLY COMPANYDistrict Court, D. New Jersey · 2025
- THERAVANCE BIOPHARMA R&D IP, LLC v. EUGIA PHARMA SPECIALTIES LTD.District Court, D. New Jersey · 2025