Patent opinions from the Eastern District of Texas and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

E.D. Tex.

Repligen Corporation et al v. Bristol-Myers Squibb Company, No. 2:06-cv-00004 (E.D. Tex. July 20, 2006)

Denied
Court
U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Marshall Division
Case No.
No. 2:06-cv-00004, Dkt. No. 33
Decided
July 20, 2006
Judge
T. John Ward, J.
Document
Memorandum Opinion and Order
Docket Entry
MEMORANDUM OPINION and ORDER - denying motion to transfer venue
Length
8 pages

From the Opinion

The passage below is extracted verbatim from the opening of the document. It has not been editorially summarized — consult the full opinion for the court's complete reasoning.

Plaintiffs Repligen Corporation (hereinafter “Repligen”) and The Regents of the University of Michigan (hereinafter “Regents”) (collectively “Plaintiffs”) sued Defendant Bristol-Myers Squibb Company, (hereinafter “Bristol-Myers”) for allegedly infringing United States Patent No. 6,685,941 (hereinafter “the ’941 patent”). The ‘941 patent involves the use of a compound called “CTLA4-Ig” to treat autoimmune diseases. Repligen moves this Court to transfer venue to the Eastern District of Michigan.