Caraco Pharmaceutical Laboratories, Ltd. v. Novo Nordisk A/s’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

9 federal appellate · 3 district ·

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 45 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “[t]he mere possibility of clearer phrasing cannot defeat the most natural reading of a statute.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Hammer v. U.S. Dep't of Health & Human Servs. · Animal Legal Defense Fund v. U.S. Dep't of Agric.

2. “[O]nce the FDA has approved a brand-name drug ... a manufacturer of a generic drug can obtain similar marketing approval through the use of abbreviated procedures. The [Act] permits a generic manufacturer to file an Abbreviated New Drug Application [ (ANDA) ] specifying that the generic has the “same active ingredients as,” and is “biologically equivalent” to, the already-approved brand-name drug.... [B]y allowing the generic to piggy-back on the pioneer’s approval efforts, [the Act] “speed[s] the introduction of low-cost generic drugs to market,” thereby furthering drug competition.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. In re Wellbutrin XL Antitrust Litigation Indirect Purchaser Class

3. “(I) that such patent information has not been filed, (II) that such patent has expired, (III) ... the date on which such patent will expire, or (IV) that such patent is invalid or will not be infringed by the manufacture, use, or sale of the new drug for which the application is submitted.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. In re Lipitor Antitrust Litigation