Nos. 2006-1634, 2006-1649.

659 F.3d 1057 (2011)

CLASSEN IMMUNOTHERAPIES, INC., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. BIOGEN IDEC, Defendant-Appellee, GlaxoSmithKline, Defendant-Appellee, Merck & Co., Inc., Defendant-Cross-Appellant, Chiron Corporation, Kaiser-Permanente, Inc., Kaiser Permanente Ventures, Kaiser Permanente International, Kaiser Permanente Insurance Company, the Permanente Federation, LLC, the Permanente Company, LLC, the Permanente Foundation, the Permanente Medical Group, Inc., Kaiser Foundation Hospitals, Kaiser Foundation Added Choice Health Plan, Inc., and Kaiser Foundation Health Plan Inc., Defendants.

United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit.

August 31, 2011.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Joseph J. Zito , Zito tlp, of Washington, DC, for plaintiff-appellant.

Donald R. Ware , Foley Hoag LLP, of Boston, Massachusetts, for defendant-appellee, Biogen IDEC. With him on the brief were Barabara A. Fiacco , and Jeremy A. Younkin. , Of counsel were Joshua M. Hiller , Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr LLP, of Boston, Massachusetts, and David A. Wilson , of Washington, DC.

George F. Pappas , Covington & Burling LLP, of Washington, DC, for defendant-appellee, GlaxoSmithKline. With him on the brief were Jeffrey B. Elikan , and Kevin B. Collins. , Of counsel was Scott C. Weidenfeller. ,

Mary B. Graham , Morris, Nichols, Arsht & Tunnell, LLP, of Wilmington, DE, for defendant-cross appellant. With her on the brief was James W. Parrett, Jr. , Of counsel on the brief were Robert L. Baechtold , Fitzpatrick, Cella, Harper & Scinto, of New York, NY; and Edward W. Murray , and Mary J. Morry , Merck & Co., Inc., of Rahway, NJ.

Opinion for the court filed by Circuit Judge NEWMAN. Additional views filed by Chief Judge RADER, in which Circuit Judge NEWMAN joins. Dissenting opinion filed by Circuit Judge MOORE.

NEWMAN, Circuit Judge.

This appeal reaches us on remand from the Supreme Court,1 the Court having vacated our decision in Classen Immunotherapies, Inc. v. Biogen Idec, 304 Fed.Appx. 866 (Fed.Cir.2008), in view of the Court's decision in Bilski v. Kappos, 561 U.S. ___, 130 S.Ct. 3218, 177 L.Ed.2d 792 (2010). We have received additional briefing, and now reconsider the appeal of the district...

Let's get started

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases