Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-4_07-cv-05702/USCOURTS-cand-4_07-cv-05702-88/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 190
Nature of Suit: Other Contract Actions
Cause of Action: 15:1 Antitrust Litigation

---

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SMITHKLINE BEECHAM CORPORATION, 

d/b/a GLAXOSMITHKLINE,

Plaintiff,

 v.

ABBOTT LABORATORIES,

Defendant.

________________________________/

No. C 07-5702 CW

ORDER ON 

OBJECTIONS TO JURY 

INSTRUCTIONS AND 

VERDICT FORM

(Docket Nos. 616 

and 618)

On January 23, 2015, the Court issued an order with appended 

jury instructions and verdict form and permitted the parties to 

file objections thereto. Docket No. 614. Defendant Abbott filed 

three objections. Docket No. 616. Plaintiff GlaxoSmithKline 

(GSK) filed a response. Docket No. 618. Having considered the 

arguments of counsel, the Court now resolves each objection in 

turn.

Abbott's first objection involves the deletion of references 

to proximate cause from the proposed verdict form and final jury 

instructions for the state law causes of action. In response, GSK 

states that it does not oppose reinserting those references to the 

extent that the language tracks that of the 2011 instructions and 

verdict form. Because GSK does not object to the reinsertion of 

the references to proximate cause, the Court will amend the 

verdict form and jury instructions accordingly.

Case 4:07-cv-05702-CW Document 620 Filed 02/20/15 Page 1 of 3
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

2

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

Abbott's second objection relates to the Court's instructions 

and verdict form question regarding part two of the unfair and 

deceptive trade practices claim. Question C.1.b of the verdict 

form asks whether "Abbott inequitably asserted its power over 

Norvir by increasing Norvir's price by 400 percent to undermine 

competition faced by Kaletra from other drugs, including GSK's 

Lexiva." Abbott argues that this language permits the jury to 

find that Abbott engaged in unfair and deceptive trade practices 

if it finds that Abbott unfairly exercised monopoly power to 

undermine competition in the marketplace, regardless of whether 

Abbott specifically targeted Lexiva. GSK responds that the 

current language is accurate and permits the jury to find for GSK 

if it finds that Abbott targeted both Lexiva and Reyataz. This 

was a topic of the discussion at the January 7, 2015 pretrial 

conference and the Court held that the instructions and verdict 

form need not mention other competitors' drugs. Language 

describing part three of the unfair and deceptive trade practices 

claim has already been revised to reflect that ruling; the Court 

will now sustain Abbott's second objection and revise part two of 

this claim to conform the language to the Court's ruling and to 

language on part three of the claim. 

Abbott's third objection relates to the Court's omission of 

Abbott's proposed instruction on detrimental reliance. As GSK 

shows in its response, Abbott has previously made this argument 

and the Court has already considered and rejected it. The Court 

thus overrules Abbott's third objection, for the reasons 

previously stated on the record, including the Court's November 

Case 4:07-cv-05702-CW Document 620 Filed 02/20/15 Page 2 of 3
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

3

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

24, 2014 order denying Abbott's renewed motion for judgment as a 

matter of law. Docket No. 591.

Final versions of the preliminary jury instructions, the 

final jury instructions and the verdict form are attached to this 

order. 

Dated: February 20, 2015

CLAUDIA WILKEN

United States District Judge

Case 4:07-cv-05702-CW Document 620 Filed 02/20/15 Page 3 of 3