Logourl black
From our private database of 14,100+ case briefs...

Pharmaceutical Resources, Inc. v. Roxane Laboratories, Inc.

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
253 Fed. Appx. 26 (2007)


Facts

Bristol-Myers Squibb (“BMS”) was the first company to successfully develop a liquid composition of megestrol acetate using one stable suspension. BMS patented its process and named the only composition it used–polyethylene glycol–as a wetting agent and polysorbate 80 as a surfactant. After determining that flocculated stable suspensions of megestrol acetate could be formed using different surfactants and wetting agents, Pharmaceutical Resources, Inc. and Par Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (“Par” collectively) (plaintiff) designed around the BMS patent by utilizing different ingredients and concentrations to create stable flocculated suspensions of megestrol acetate. Par ultimately received several patents for its compositions as well as the processes for making the suspensions, including the ‘318 and ‘320 patents. In 2003, Par filed suit against Roxanne Laboratories, Inc. (“Roxanne”) (defendant) claiming infringement of the ‘318 and ‘320 patents. Roxanne denied infringement and argued that Par’s patents were invalid and unenforceable. After a Markman hearing, Roxanne moved for summary judgment of invalidity, arguing that Par’s claims in the ‘318 and ‘320 patents were invalid for lack of enablement. The district court granted Roxanne’s summary judgment motion, concluding that Par was not entitled to the broad claims it asserted in its ‘318 and ‘320 patents. Par appealed.

Rule of Law

The rule of law is the black letter law upon which the court rested its decision.

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

Issue

The issue section includes the dispositive legal issue in the case phrased as a question.

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

Holding and Reasoning (Moore, J.)

The holding and reasoning section includes:

  • A "yes" or "no" answer to the question framed in the issue section;
  • A summary of the majority or plurality opinion, using the CREAC method; and
  • The procedural disposition (e.g. reversed and remanded, affirmed, etc.).

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 97,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Vanderbilt, Berkeley, and the University of Illinois—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students. Read our student testimonials.

  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students. Read more about Quimbee.

Here's why 220,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 14,100 briefs, keyed to 189 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.