USA Ex Rel Merena v. Smithkline Beecham
This text of USA Ex Rel Merena v. Smithkline Beecham (USA Ex Rel Merena v. Smithkline Beecham) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
Opinions of the United 2000 Decisions States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
2-29-2000
USA Ex Rel Merena v. Smithkline Beecham Precedential or Non-Precedential:
Docket 98-1497
Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.law.villanova.edu/thirdcircuit_2000
Recommended Citation "USA Ex Rel Merena v. Smithkline Beecham" (2000). 2000 Decisions. Paper 40. http://digitalcommons.law.villanova.edu/thirdcircuit_2000/40
This decision is brought to you for free and open access by the Opinions of the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit at Villanova University School of Law Digital Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in 2000 Decisions by an authorized administrator of Villanova University School of Law Digital Repository. For more information, please contact Benjamin.Carlson@law.villanova.edu. Filed April 21, 2000
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT
No. 98-1497
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA EX REL. ROBERT J. MERENA
v.
SMITHKLINE BEECHAM CORPORATION
United States of America, Appellant
No. 98-1498
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA EX REL. KEVIN J. SPEAR; THE BERKELEY COMMUNITY LAW CENTER; JACK DOWDEN
SMITHKLINE BEECHAM CLINICAL LABORATORIES, INC.
No. 98-1499
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA EX REL. GLENN GROSSENBACHER; CHARLES W. ROBINSON, JR.
v. SMITHKLINE BEECHAM CLINICAL LABORATORIES, INC.
ON APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA (Dist. Ct. No. 93--cv--5974) District Judge: The Honorable Donald W. VanArtsdalen
Argued: March 5, 1999
Before: ALITO, McKEE, AND GARWOOD,* Circuit Judges
(Opinion Filed: February 29, 2000)
ORDER AMENDING SLIP OPINION
The slip opinion in this case is amended as follows:
1. In the first sentence of Part IA of the opinion, the phrase "had adopted a scheme" is amended to read "had adopted the following scheme."
2. In the second sentence of Part IA of the opinion, the words "Specifically, the government suspected that" are deleted and the word "the" preceding the word "laboratories" is capitalized.
3. The paragraph indentation between the second and third sentences of Part IA of the opinion is eliminated.
BY THE COURT:
Samuel A. Alito Circuit Judge _________________________________________________________________
* The Honorable Will L. Garwood, Senior Circuit Judge for the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, sitting by designation.
2 A True Copy: Teste:
Clerk of the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
USA Ex Rel Merena v. Smithkline Beecham, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/usa-ex-rel-merena-v-smithkline-beecham-ca3-2000.