Chemi SpA v. GlaxoSmithKline’s Empirical Analysis
2005
Citation profile
1 federal appellate · 2 district ·
Relationships
Applies 15 U.S.C. § 15 (§ 4 of the Clayton Antitrust Act of 1914) · 15 U.S.C. § 15B (Sherman Antitrust Act) · 15 U.S.C. § 2 (§ 2 of the Sherman Antitrust Act) · 15 U.S.C. § 62 · 21 U.S.C. § 355 (Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act)
Relies on Brunswick Corporation v. Pueblo Bowl-O-Mat Inc · Associated General Contractors of California, Inc. v. California State Council of Carpenters · Zenith Radio Corp. v. Hazeltine Research, Inc. · Hanover Shoe, Inc. v. United Shoe MacHinery Corp. · Professional Real Estate Investors, Inc. v. Columbia Pictures Industries, 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 10 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Even though Chemi was not a direct competitor of GSK, its alleged injury was inextricably intertwined with the injury GSK sought to inflict on the nabumetone market. After Chemi determined that it could manufacture nabumetone commercially, Chemi was prevented from selling nabumetone to these vendors when GSK brought a bogus patent infringement suit against them with the very purpose of perpetuating its monopoly with respect to nabumetone. Chemi’s injury is direct, and its claim is not speculative.”
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.