Skip to main content
S.D. New York· 5/16/1995

Bio-Technology General Corp. v. Genentech, Inc.

Citations

  • 886 F. Supp. 377
  • 36 U.S.P.Q. 2d (BNA) 1169
  • 1995 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 6533
  • 1995 WL 307195

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

  • to demonstrate sham lawsuit in antitrust context, defendant must show that lawsuit is objectively baseless and not legally viable and is merely an attempt to interfere with defendant’s business relationships
  • “Plaintiff argues that . . . its loss of the ability to enter into third party contracts is sufficient to fulfill this requirement [of showing an interference with property]. However, the clear weight of case law is to the contrary.”
  • “Plaintiff argues that its $2 million in attorney's fees and its loss of the ability to enter into third party contracts is sufficient to fulfill this requirement [of showing an interference with property]. However, the clear weight of case law is to the contrary.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Motley

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

14 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

39 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Other cases named Bio-Technology General Corp. v. Genentech, Inc.

3 other CourtListener records share this case name.

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.