Case Name: ENZO BIOCHEM, INC., Enzo Life Sciences, Inc., and Yale University, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. APPLERA CORP. and Tropix, Inc., Defendants-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2010-05-26
Citations: 605 F.3d 1347
Docket Number: No. 2009-1281
Parties: ENZO BIOCHEM, INC., Enzo Life Sciences, Inc., and Yale University, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. APPLERA CORP. and Tropix, Inc., Defendants-Appellees.
Judges: Before MICHEL, Chief Judge, NEWMAN, MAYER, PLAGER, LOURIE, RADER, BRYSON, GAJARSA, LINN, DYR, PROST, and MOORE, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: Federal Reporter 3d Series
Volume: 605
Pages: 1347–1349

Head Matter:
ENZO BIOCHEM, INC., Enzo Life Sciences, Inc., and Yale University, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. APPLERA CORP. and Tropix, Inc., Defendants-Appellees.
No. 2009-1281.
United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit.
May 26, 2010.
Nicholas Groombridge, Weil, Gotshal & Manges LLP, of New York, NY, filed a combined petition for panel rehearing and rehearing en banc for. defendants-appellees. With him on the petition was Jennifer H. Wu. Of counsel on the petition was Rurtis D. MacFerrin, Life Technologies Corporation, of Foster City, CA.
L. Gene Spears, Baker Botts L.L.P., of Houston, TX, filed a response to the petition for plaintiffs-appellants. With him on the response was Michael Hawes.
Before MICHEL, Chief Judge, NEWMAN, MAYER, PLAGER, LOURIE, RADER, BRYSON, GAJARSA, LINN, DYR, PROST, and MOORE, Circuit Judges.
Judge Plager participated only in the decision on the petition for panel rehearing.

Opinion:
ORDER
PER CURIAM.
Defendants-Appellees Applera Corp. and Tropix, Inc. filed a combined petition for panel rehearing and rehearing en banc. The panel requested a response from Plaintiffs-Appellants Enzo Biochem, Inc., Enzo Life Sciences, Inc., and Yale University. The court granted Defendants-Appellees leave to file a reply. The petition for rehearing was considered by the panel that heard the appeal, and thereafter the petition for rehearing en banc, the response to the petition, and reply were referred to the circuit judges who are in regular active service.
Upon consideration thereof,
It Is Ordered That:
(1) The petition of Defendants-Appellees for panel rehearing is denied.
(2) The petition of Defendants-Appellees for rehearing en banc is denied.
(3) The mandate of the court will issue on June 2, 2010.