1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. F.Supp.2d
  4. 193 F.Supp.2d
  5. 193 F.Supp.2d 125 (2002)
 

MORPHOSYS AG v. CAMBRIDGE ANTIBODY TECHNOLOGY LTD.

No. CIV.A.99-1012.

193 F.Supp.2d 125 (2002)

MORPHOSYS AG, Plaintiff, v. CAMBRIDGE ANTIBODY TECHNOLOGY LIMITED, Defendant.

United States District Court, District of Columbia.

March 8, 2002.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

John Skilton, David J. Harth, Mireya Llaurdao, Colin G. Sandercock, Paul M. Booth, Heller Ehrman White & McAuliffe, Washington DC, John Skilton, David J. Harth, Heller Ehrman White & McAuliffe, Madison, WI, for Plaintiff.

Keith J. Harrison, Steven Schaars, Trina L. Fairley, King, Pagano & Harrison, Washington, DC, David W. Clough, Audrey L. Bartnicki, Marshall, O'Toole, Gerstein, Murray & Borun, Chicago, IL, Brian H. Corcoran, Roger Furey, Katten Muchin Zavis, Washington, DC, Timothy J. Vezeau, Jane J. Choi, Katten Muchin Zavis, Chicago, IL, for Defendant.

MEMORANDUM

ROBERTSON, District Judge.

This memorandum, when read together with the Court's memorandum opinion of August 17, 2001 and the Court's memorandum, notice and order filed December 21, 2001, sets forth the reasons for the Court's order, entered today, granting partial summary judgment against Cambridge Antibody Technology Limited and in favor of Morphosys AG on CAT's claim of infringement (and Morphosys's prayer for a judicial declaration...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases