Case Name: MEDIMMUNE, INC., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. CENTOCOR, INC., Defendants-Appellees, and The Trustees of Columbia University in the City of New York and The Board of Trustees of the Leland Stanford Junior University, Defendants-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2007-04-11
Citations: 223 F. App'x 979
Docket Number: No. 2004-1499
Parties: MEDIMMUNE, INC., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. CENTOCOR, INC., Defendants-Appellees, and The Trustees of Columbia University in the City of New York and The Board of Trustees of the Leland Stanford Junior University, Defendants-Appellees.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 223
Pages: 979–979

Head Matter:
MEDIMMUNE, INC., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. CENTOCOR, INC., Defendants-Appellees, and The Trustees of Columbia University in the City of New York and The Board of Trustees of the Leland Stanford Junior University, Defendants-Appellees.
No. 2004-1499.
United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit.
April 11, 2007.
Before SCHALL, BRYSON, and GAJARSA, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
ON MOTION
ORDER
In MedImmune, Inc. v. Centocor, Inc., — U.S.-, 127 S.Ct. 1118, 166 L.Ed.2d 888 (2007), the Supreme Court vacated this court's decision, reported at 409 F.3d 1376 (Fed.Cir.2005), and remanded for further consideration in light of MedImmune, Inc. v. Genentech, Inc., — U.S.-, 127 S.Ct. 764, 166 L.Ed.2d 604 (2007). DefendantsAppellees have moved for briefing and argument on remand. On February 23, 2007, we ordered that (1) the mandate issued on September 1, 2005, be recalled and the appeal be reinstated; (2) the case be returned to the original merits panel; and (3) the parties submit briefs of not more than 10 pages in length stating what action they believed this court should take in response to the decision of the Supreme Court in MedImmune, Inc. v. Genentech, Inc.
Upon consideration thereof,
IT IS ORDERED THAT:
(1) Defendants-Appellees' motion is denied to the extent it requests further briefing and argument on the appropriate disposition of the appeal.
(2) We remand to the district court for further proceedings consistent with the Court's opinion in MedImmune, Inc. v. Genentech, Inc.