Glaxo, Inc. v. Novopharm, Ltd.’s Empirical Analysis
110 F.3d 1562 · 1997
Citation profile
47 federal appellate · 47 district · 2 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 177 later decisions — most recently May 2025 · most notably Mas-Hamilton Group v. LaGard, Inc. (1998), Bayer Ag Bayer Corporation v. Elan Pharmaceutical Research Corporation Elan Corporation Plc (2000)
47 federal appellate · 47 district · 2 state decisions
Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.
Relationships
Applies 21 U.S.C. § 355 (Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act) · 28 U.S.C. § 1295 · 28 U.S.C. § 2201 · 35 U.S.C. § 271
Relies on Aetna Life Ins Co of Hartford Conn v. Haworth · MARKMAN Et Al. v. WESTVIEW INSTRUMENTS, INC., Et Al. · Skelly Oil Co. v. Phillips Petroleum Co. · Louisville & Nashville Railroad v. Mottley · Markman v. Westview Instruments, Inc.
Most-quoted passages
The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 177 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[i]t shall be an act of infringement to submit ... an [ANDA application to the FDA] ... if the purpose of such submission is to obtain approval under such Act to engage in the commercial manufacture, use, or sale of a drug or veterinary biological product claimed in a patent or the use of which is claimed in a patent before the expiration of such patent.”
6 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[ Section] 271(e)(2) provided patentees with a defined act of infringement sufficient to create case or controversy jurisdiction to enable a court to promptly resolve any dispute concerning infringement and validity.”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[i]t shall not be an act of infringement to make, use, or sell . . . a patented invention . . . solely for uses reasonably related to the development and submission of information under a Federal law which regulates the manufacture, use, or sale of drugs.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
How this case has been treated — in progress
Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.