Classen Immunotherapies, Inc. v. King Pharmaceuticals, Inc.

178 F. App'x 13
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
DecidedApril 10, 2006
DocketNo. 2006-1219
StatusPublished

This text of 178 F. App'x 13 (Classen Immunotherapies, Inc. v. King Pharmaceuticals, Inc.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Classen Immunotherapies, Inc. v. King Pharmaceuticals, Inc., 178 F. App'x 13 (Fed. Cir. 2006).

Opinion

ON MOTION

MICHEL, Chief Judge.

ORDER

Elan Pharmaceuticals, Inc. moves to dismiss this appeal, from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland in 04-CV-03521, for lack of jurisdiction. King Pharmaceuticals, Inc. and Classen oppose. Elan replies.

Classen sued Elan and King for infringement. The district court granted summary judgment that King did not infringe. Although Classen requested entry of a Fed.R.Civ.P. 54(b) judgment, the district court did not grant that motion but instead entered judgment in favor of King on the infringement claim. Classen’s claim against Elan and various counterclaims remain pending. Thus, there is no final judgment and any appeal is premature. Nystrom v. TREX Co., Inc., 339 F.3d 1347 (Fed.Cir.2003).

Accordingly,

IT IS ORDERED THAT:

(1) The motion is granted.

(2) All sides shall bear their own costs.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Ron Nystrom v. Trex Company, Inc. And Trex Company, LLC
339 F.3d 1347 (Federal Circuit, 2003)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
178 F. App'x 13, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/classen-immunotherapies-inc-v-king-pharmaceuticals-inc-cafc-2006.