Cases

OPINION REINHARDT, Circuit Judge: The central question in this appeal arises out of a lawsuit brought by Smith-Kline Beecham (GSK) against Abbott Laboratories (Abbott) that contains antitrust, contract, and unfair trade practice (UTPA) claims. The dispute relates to a licensing agreement and the pricing of HIV medications, the latter being a subject of cons

ORDER A sua sponte call for a vote on rehearing this case en banc was made by an active judge of this court. The call failed to receive a majority of the votes of the non-reeused active judges. Fed. R.App. P. 35. The sua sponte en banc call is rejected. O’SCANNLAIN, Circuit Judge, joined by BYBEE and BEA, Circuit Judges, dissenting from the denial of rehearing en banc: This

287 F.Supp.2d 576 (2002) SMITHKLINE BEECHAM CORPORATION and Beecham Group, P.L.C. v. GENEVA PHARMACEUTICALS, INC. SmithKline Beecham Corporation v. Apotex Corporation, Apotex, Inc. and Torpharm, Inc. SmithKline Beecham Corporation and Beecham Group, P.L.C. v. Zenith Goldline Pharmaceuticals, Inc. SmithKline Beecham Corporation v. Apotex Corporation, Apotex, Inc. and Torpharm, Inc. SmithKline Beecham Corpora

FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT SMITHKLINE BEECHAM No. 11-17357 CORPORATION, DBA GlaxoSmithKline, D.C. No. Plaintiff-Appellee, 4:07-cv-05702-CW v. ABBOTT LABORATORIES, Defendant-Appellant. SMITHKLINE BEECHAM No. 11-17373 CORPORATION, DBA GlaxoSmithKline, D.C. No. Plaintiff-Appellant, 4:07-cv-05702-CW

919 F.Supp. 173 (1996) Josephine CAMPBELL, Administratrix of the Estate of John E. Campbell, Jr., and Josephine Campbell, in her own right, Plaintiff, v. SMITHKLINE BEECHAM, et al., Defendants. Civil Action No. 95-CV-4255. United States District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania. March 14, 1996. *174 Nancy G. Rhoads, Albert J. Brooks, Jr.

(2008) Terri S. O'NEAL, individually and as successor-in-interest to the Estate of Benjamin L. Bratt; Barry M. Bratt, individually, Plaintiffs, v. SMITHKLINE BEECHAM CORPORATION d/b/a Glaxosmithkline, a Pennsylvania Corporation; and Does 1-50, Defendants. No. CIV S-06-1063 FCD/DAD. United States District Court, E.D. California. January 30, 2008. MEMORAND

108 F.Supp.2d 116 (2000) BLUE CROSS OF CALIFORNIA, et al., v. SMITHKLINE BEECHAM CLINICAL LABORATORIES, INC. No. 3:97CV1795 AVC. United States District Court, D. Connecticut. March 31, 2000. *117 John Burns Farley, Daniel P. Scapellati, Halloran & Sage, Hartford, Thomas W. Brunner, Laura A. Foggan, C. Russell Clause, Eric Mah

WINTER, Chief Judge: This appeal arises out of a copyright action alleging infringement of appellant’s copyright in a user’s guide and audiotape developed for its Nicorette-brand gum. Appellees, in obtaining approval to sell a competing generic nicotine gum product, were directed by the Food and Drug Administration (“FDA”) to use labeling almost identical to appellant’s copyrighted guide and tape. The FDA acted purs

`TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN NO. 03-06-00254-CV Darlene Balas, as Next Friend of C. L. H., A. E. H., and L. P. H., Appellants

211 F.3d 21 (2nd Cir. 2000) SmithKline Beecham Consumer Healthcare, L.P., PlaintiffAppellant,v.Watson Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Watson Laboratories, Inc., and Circa Pharmaceuticals, Inc., DefendantsAppellees. Docket No. 99-9501August Term, 1999 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALSFor the Second Circuit Argued: January 13, 2000Decided: April 04, 2000

Taranto, Circuit Judge. *1350 ThermoLife International, LLC exclusively licensed four patents from the Board of Trustees of the Leland Stanford Junior University. It filed infringement suits, asserting selected claims of four patents, against numerous defendants, including Hi-Tech Pharm

LUCERO, Circuit Judge. Qwest Corporation and Qwest Broadband Services, Inc. (collectively, “Qwest”) seek to appeal a district court order granting partial summary judgment. After Richard Grosvenor filed this putative class action, Qwest moved to compel arbitration under the Federal Arbitration Act (“FAA”), 9 U.S.C. §§ 1 et seq. The district court denied Qwest’s motion and sche

421 F.3d 817 Patrick CAMPBELL, M.D., UNITED STATES of America and State of California ex rel., Plaintiff-Appellant,United States of America, Intervenor-Appellee,v.REDDING MEDICAL CENTER, a California corporation; Tenet Healthcare Corporation, a Nevada corporation; Chae Hyun Moon, M.D.; Thomas Russ, M.D.; Fidel Realyvasquez, M.D.; Tenet Healthsystem Hospitals, Inc., a Delaware corporation; Cardiology Associates of Northern California; Ri

SILVERMAN, Circuit Judge. The False Claims Act provides that “[n]o court shall have jurisdiction” over a qui tam action based on allegations of fraud that already have been publicly disclosed, unless the relator was an “original source” of the information. 31 U.S.C. § 3730(e)(4)(A). In addition, the Act precludes any person from filing a subsequent “related action based on the facts underlying the pending action” when a qui

OPINION Opinion by Justice Myers This case involves claims by a fashion model, Stephen W. Clark, against a department store, Dillard’s, Inc., and a modeling agency, The Campbell Agency, Inc. (TCA). Clark sued Dillard’s and TCA after pictures of Clark were used without his permission on packages of underwear that were sold in Dillard

369 F.3d 732 2660 WOODLEY ROAD JOINT VENTURE; Woodley Road Associates, Inc.; John Hancock Mutual Life Insurance Company; Sumitomo Life Realty (N.Y.)* Inc.v.ITT SHERATON CORPORATION; Sheraton Operating Corporation; Washington Sheraton Corporation** ITT Sheraton Corporation, Sheraton Operating Corporation and Washington Sherat

PER CURIAM. AFFIRMED. See Felix v. Hoffmann-LaRoche, Inc., 540 So.2d 102 (Fla.1989). ERVIN, ALLEN, and WOLF, JJ., concur.

In the United States Court of Appeals For the Seventh Circuit ____________________ No. 22-3221 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. CHRISTOPHER JOHNSON, Defendant-Appellant. ____________________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the

DAVIS, Justice: This matter involves two consolidated petitions for writs of prohibition filed under the original jurisdiction of this Court. The petition filed in Case No. 13-0086 was brought by the defendants in seven consolidated eases pending before the Circuit Court of Mason County; 1 and the petition in Case No. 1

OPINION LAMBERT, J., JUDGE: The Commonwealth of Kentucky has appealed from the order of the Harlan Circuit Court granting Rex Hinton’s. Kentucky Rules of Evidence (KRE) 504 motion to assert the spousal privilege in his criminal prosecution for Torture of Dog or Cat in violation of Kentucky Revised Statutes (KRS) 525.135. Because we agree with the Commonwealth that the trial court erred as a matter of law