Case Name: AVENTIS PHARMACEUTICALS, INC., Plaintiff/Counterclaim Defendant-Appellant, and AMR Technology, Inc., Plaintiff/Counterclaim Defendant, Appellant, and Albany Molecular Research, Inc., Counterclaim-Defendant, v. BARR LABORATORIES, INC., Defendant/Counterclaimant-Appellee, and Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., Defendant-Appellee, and Amino Chemicals, Ltd., Defendant-Appellee, and Ranbaxy Pharmaceuticals, Inc. and Ranbaxy Laboratories, Ltd., Defendants-Counterclaimants-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2006-11-08
Citations: 208 F. App'x 842
Docket Number: Nos. 06-1314, 06-1315
Parties: AVENTIS PHARMACEUTICALS, INC., Plaintiff/Counterclaim Defendant-Appellant, and AMR Technology, Inc., Plaintiff/Counterclaim Defendant, Appellant, and Albany Molecular Research, Inc., Counterclaim-Defendant, v. BARR LABORATORIES, INC., Defendant/Counterclaimant-Appellee, and Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., Defendant-Appellee, and Amino Chemicals, Ltd., Defendant-Appellee, and Ranbaxy Pharmaceuticals, Inc. and Ranbaxy Laboratories, Ltd., Defendants-Counterclaimants-Appellees.
Judges: Before RADER, Circuit Judge, CLEVENGER, Senior Circuit Judge, and PROST, Circuit Judge.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 208
Pages: 842–843

Head Matter:
This case was not selected for publication in the Federal Reporter
NOTE: Pursuant to Fed. Cir. R. 47.6, this disposition is not citable as precedent.
It is a public record.
AVENTIS PHARMACEUTICALS, INC., Plaintiff/Counterclaim Defendant-Appellant, and AMR Technology, Inc., Plaintiff/Counterclaim Defendant, Appellant, and Albany Molecular Research, Inc., Counterclaim-Defendant, v. BARR LABORATORIES, INC., Defendant/Counterclaimant-Appellee, and Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., Defendant-Appellee, and Amino Chemicals, Ltd., Defendant-Appellee, and Ranbaxy Pharmaceuticals, Inc. and Ranbaxy Laboratories, Ltd., Defendants-Counterclaimants-Appellees.
Nos. 06-1314, 06-1315.
United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit.
Nov. 8, 2006.
Before RADER, Circuit Judge, CLEVENGER, Senior Circuit Judge, and PROST, Circuit Judge.

Opinion:
JUDGMENT
PER CURIAM
This CAUSE having been heard and considered it is
ORDERED and ADJUDGED:
AFFIRMED. See Fed. Cir. R. 36.