Patent Case Watch

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

E.D. Tex.

Mylan Institutional LLC et al v. Aurobindo Pharma Ltd et al, No. 2:16-cv-00491 (E.D. Tex. Feb. 7, 2017)

Adopted Report and recommendation (or magistrate's order) adopted
Injunction Infringement Summary Judgment
Court
U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Marshall Division
Case No.
No. 2:16-cv-00491, Dkt. No. 122
Decided
February 7, 2017
Judge
Robert W. Schroeder, III, J.
Document
Report and Recommendation
Docket Entry
ORDER ADOPTING 101 Report and Recommendations ORDERING Defendants to submit a brief within 14 days of this order and Plaintiffs to respond within 7 days after service of brief
Length
3 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.

Before the Court is the Report and Recommendation (Docket No. 101) filed by Magistrate Judge Payne on November 21, 2016 recommending th at Plaintiffs’ motion for a preliminary injunction (Docket No. 20) be granted. Au robindo objects to the Re port and Recommendation, contending that it includes four incorrect conclusions of law. The Court disagrees for the following reasons. First, Aurobindo argues that the Report inco rrectly determines that Aurobindo failed to raise a substantial question regarding noninfringeme nt of the ’992 and ’616 patents.

Download Opinion (PDF)

Source: govinfo.gov USCOURTS collection · retrieved July 23, 2026 · Report an error