Case Name: ELI LILLY AND COMPANY, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. TEVA PARENTERAL MEDICINES, INC., App Pharmaceuticals LLC, Pliva Hrvatska D.O.O., Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., and Barr Laboratories, Inc., Defendants-Appellants
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2014-07-25
Citations: 567 F. App'x 967
Docket Number: No. 2014-1455
Parties: ELI LILLY AND COMPANY, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. TEVA PARENTERAL MEDICINES, INC., App Pharmaceuticals LLC, Pliva Hrvatska D.O.O., Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., and Barr Laboratories, Inc., Defendants-Appellants.
Judges: Before REYNA, BRYSON, and TARANTO, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 567
Pages: 967–967

Head Matter:
ELI LILLY AND COMPANY, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. TEVA PARENTERAL MEDICINES, INC., App Pharmaceuticals LLC, Pliva Hrvatska D.O.O., Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., and Barr Laboratories, Inc., Defendants-Appellants.
No. 2014-1455.
United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit.
July 25, 2014.
Adam Lawrence Perlman, Bruce Gen-derson, Dov Philip Grossman, David M. Krinsky, Andrew V. Trask, Williams & Connolly LLP, Washington, DC, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
Daryl L. Wiesen, Attorney, Elaine Blais, Attorney, Michael B. Cottier, Brian Joseph Prew, Goodwin Procter LLP, New York, NY, Emily L. Rapalino, Goodwin Procter LLP, Boston, MA, for Defendants-Appellants.
Before REYNA, BRYSON, and TARANTO, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
ON MOTION
ORDER
BRYSON, Circuit Judge.
The parties jointly move to remand this appeal so that they can litigate the issue of infringement in light of the United States Supreme Court's recent decision in Limelight Networks, Inc. v. Akamai Technologies, Inc., — U.S. -, 134 S.Ct. 2111, 189 L.Ed.2d 52 (2014). In the district court, the parties jointly stipulated to induced infringement and proceeded to trial only on validity. As part of that stipulation, however, appellants reserved the right to litigate infringement if the Supreme Court granted the then-pending petition for writ of certiorari in Akamai and reversed or vacated this court's decision.
Accordingly,
It Is ORdered That:
(1) The motion is granted. This case is remanded for further proceedings consistent with this order.
(2) Each side shall bear its own costs.