Legal Opinion · Dissent

Eli Lilly & Co. v. Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc.

Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

Decided February 24, 2009No. 2009-1071Published

1DissentProst, Circuit Judge

The thirty-month stay described in 21 U.S.C. § 355(j)(5)(B)(iii) may be extended for one reason and one reason only: “because either party to the action failed to reasonably cooperate in expediting the action.” Because I believe that the majority misapplies the law and misapprehends the facts in affirming the district court, I respectfully dissent.

I

The question here is one of statutory construction, which we review de novo. Although the majority is correct in that a district court’s decision to issue a stay is generally reviewed for abuse of discretion, see, e.g., Cherokee Nation v. United…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Gould v. Control Laser Corp.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1983
  2. Nazomi Communications, Inc. v. Arm Holdings, PlcCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2005
  3. The Cherokee Nation of Oklahoma v. The United States, the Choctaw Nation of Oklahoma and the Chickasaw Nation v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1997
  4. Jerry Gechter, Robert L. Pokress, Jeffrey A. Fried, and G. Wayne Andrews v. Wayne A. Davidson and Diana S. WinterCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1997
  5. Graco, Inc. v. Binks Manufacturing CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1995

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

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

Powered by the Exa API