ASTRAZENECA LP v. Apotex, Inc.’s Empirical Analysis
2009
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 4 district ·
Relationships
Applies 21 U.S.C. § 355 (Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act) · 35 U.S.C. § 101 · 35 U.S.C. § 102 · 35 U.S.C. § 103 · 35 U.S.C. § 271 · 35 U.S.C. § 282
Relies on Vandygriff v. Phillips · Markman v. Westview Instruments, Inc. · Cybor Corporation v. Fas Technologies, Inc., and Fastar Ltd., Defendants-Cross · Bonito Boats, Inc. v. Thunder Craft Boats, Inc. · Hildebrand v. Social Security Administration
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 7 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[although the Thorax advertisement states that “[t]he maintenance dose should be the lowest dose which keeps the patient symptom-free[,]” Dr. Chipps testified that this statement does not instruct once-daily dosing because the ad was published “back in 1994 ... before we had any information or historical perspective that once a day therapy worked for anybody.” The Court finds this answer persuasive.”
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.