Case ID: f-appx_528/html/0991-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

BAYER HEALTHCARE PHARMACEUTICALS, INC. and Bayer Schering Pharma AG, Plaintiffs-Appellees, v. WATSON PHARMACEUTICALS, INC. and Watson Laboratories, Inc., Defendants-Appellants, and Sandoz Inc., Defendant-Appellant. Bayer Schering Pharma AG and Bayer Healthcare Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Plaintiffs-Appellees, v. Lupin, Ltd. and Lupin Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Defendants-Appellants.
    Nos. 2012-1397, 2012-1398, 2012-1400, 2012-1424.
    United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit.
    Aug. 12, 2013.
    Peter B. Bensinger, Jr., Attorney, Matthew R. Ford, Attorney, Adam Mortara, Attorney, Paul Skiermont, Attorney, Bart-lit Beck Herman Palenchar & Scott LLP, Chicago, IL, Plaintiff-Appellees.
    Joseph A. Hynds, Esq., Steven M. Lieberman, Lisa N. Phillips, Rothwell, Figg, Ernst & Manbeck, P.C., Mark T. Jansen, Attorney, Kristin Marie Cooklin, Esq., Counsel, Cedric C.Y. Tan, Esq., Crowell & Moring, LLP, San Francisco, CA, Robert Fritz Green, Christopher Thomas Griffith, Kate M. Lesciotto, Jamaica P. Szeliga, Counsel, Leydig, Voit & Mayer, Ltd., Two Prudential Plaza, Chicago, IL, Washington, DC, Defendant-Appellants.
    Before RADER, Chief Judge, NEWMAN, LOURIE, SCHALL, DYK, PROST, MOORE, REYNA, WALLACH, and TARANTO, Circuit Judges.
    
    
      
      . Judge Schall participated in only the decision on panel rehearing.
    
    
      
      . Judge O’Malley did not participate.
    
   REYNA, Circuit Judge, dissents without opinion from the denial of the petition for rehearing en banc.

ON PETITION FOR REHEARING AND REHEARING EN BANC

PER CURIAM.

ORDER

A combined petition for rehearing and rehearing en banc was filed by Plaintiffs-Appellees Bayer, and a response thereto was invited by the court and filed by Defendants-Appellants. The petition for rehearing was considered by the panel that heard the appeals, and thereafter the petition for rehearing en banc and the response were referred to the circuit judges who are authorized to request a poll of whether to rehear the appeals en banc. A poll was requested, taken, and failed.

Upon consideration thereof,

It Is Ordered That:

(1) The petition of Plaintiffs-Appellees for panel rehearing is denied.

(2) The petition of Plaintiffs-Appellees for rehearing en banc is denied.

(3) The mandate of the court will issue on August 19, 2013.