TorPharm, Inc. v. Thompson’s Empirical Analysis
2003
Citation profile
4 federal appellate · 5 district ·
Relationships
Applies 21 U.S.C. § 355 (Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act) · 35 U.S.C. § 271 · 5 U.S.C. § 701
Relies on United States v. Mead Corp. · Bowman Transportation, Inc. v. Arkansas-Best Freight System, Inc. · Butz v. Glover Livestock Commission Co. · O'Dell III v. Jd Netherland · Eli Lilly & Co. v. Medtronic, 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 11 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“that the FDA acted reasonably in not departing from its well-settled rule that a section viii statement and paragraph IV certification cannot be filed as to the same patent, [and that] the agency's corresponding conclusion that no applicant was entitled to exclusivity on the '479 patent must be upheld.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“in the absence of some indication that it conflicts with any of the constraints on the agency's regulatory authority, is inconsistent with the agency's own prior pronouncements, or is otherwise poorly reasoned or unpersuasive. There are no such indications here.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“the breadth of agency discretion is, if anything, at zenith when the action assailed relates primarily not to the issue of ascertaining whether conduct violates the statute, or regulations, but rather to the fashioning of policies, remedies and sanctions.”
1 later decision 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.