Case Name: CANCER RESEARCH TECHNOLOGY LIMITED and Schering Corporation, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. BARR LABORATORIES, INC. and Barr Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Defendants-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2011-02-28
Citations: 637 F.3d 1293
Docket Number: No. 2010-1204
Parties: CANCER RESEARCH TECHNOLOGY LIMITED and Schering Corporation, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. BARR LABORATORIES, INC. and Barr Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Defendants-Appellees.
Judges: Before RADER, Chief Judge, NEWMAN, LOURIE, BRYSON, GAJARSA, LINN, DYK, PROST, MOORE, and O’MALLEY, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: Federal Reporter 3d Series
Volume: 637
Pages: 1293–1297

Head Matter:
CANCER RESEARCH TECHNOLOGY LIMITED and Schering Corporation, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. BARR LABORATORIES, INC. and Barr Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Defendants-Appellees.
No. 2010-1204.
United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit.
Feb. 28, 2011.
George C. Lombardi, Winston & Strawn LLP, of Chicago, IL, filed a petition for rehearing en banc for defendants-appellees. With him on the petition were Lynn M. Ulrich, Maureen L. Rurka, Ivan M. Poullaos, Julia M. Johnson, of Chicago, IL; and Steffen N. Johnson, of Washington, DC.
Matthew D. Powers, Weil Gotshal & Manges LLP, of Redwood Shores, CA filed a response to the petition for plaintiffs-appellants. With him on the response were Jennifer H. Wu, of New York, NY; and Nicolas G. Barzoukas, of Houston, TX.
Before RADER, Chief Judge, NEWMAN, LOURIE, BRYSON, GAJARSA, LINN, DYK, PROST, MOORE, and O’MALLEY, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PROST, Circuit Judge, with whom GAJARSA, MOORE, and O'MALLEY, Circuit Judges, join, dissents from the denial of the petition for rehearing en banc.
DYK, Circuit Judge, dissents from the denial of the petition for rehearing en banc.
ORDER
PER CURIAM.
A petition for rehearing en banc was filed by Defendants-Appellees, and a response thereto was invited by the court and filed by Plaintiffs-Appellants. The petition for rehearing was referred to the panel that heard the appeal, and thereafter the petition for rehearing en banc and the response were referred to the circuit judges who are authorized to request a poll whether to rehear the appeal en banc. A poll was requested, taken, and failed.
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 March 7, 2011.