Legal Opinion
Biogen, Inc. v. SCHERING AG
District Court, D. Massachusetts
Decided December 4, 1996No. C.A. 96-10916-MLWPublishedCited by 9 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
WOLF, District Judge.
I. INTRODUCTION
On May 3, 1996, Plaintiff Biogen, Inc. (“Biogen”) filed this action seeking a declaration that its Avonex product does not infringe defendants’ McCormick ’567 patent (the “’567 Patent”) and that the ’567 Patent is invalid. Biogen did not, however, attempt to serve its complaint immediately on the defendants. On July 3, 1996, defendant Berlex Laboratories, Inc. (“Berlex”) filed its own suit in the District of New Jersey, seeking monetary and injunctive relief against Biogen for alleged infringement of the ’567 Patent. As a result, Biogen…
2Cases cited18 opinions
- Wilton v. Seven Falls Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1995
- Maryland Casualty Co. v. Pacific Coal & Oil Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1941
- Ernst & Young v. Depositors Economic Protection Corp.Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1995
- Arrowhead Industrial Water, Inc. v. Ecolochem, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1988
- Genentech, Inc. v. Eli Lilly and Company, and the Regents of the University of CaliforniaCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1993
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- Holmes Group, Inc. v. Hamilton Beach/Proctor Silex, Inc.District Court, D. Massachusetts · 2002
- Zokaites v. Land-Cellular Corp.District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · 2006
- Amgen, Inc. v. Hoechst Marion Roussel, Inc.District Court, D. Massachusetts · 1998
- Nortek, Inc. v. MolnarDistrict Court, D. Rhode Island · 1999
- Ventrassist Pty Ltd. v. Heartware, Inc.District Court, S.D. Florida · 2005
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.