Skip to main content
· 8/12/2010

Eli Lilly & Co. v. Gottstein

Citations

  • 617 F.3d 186
  • 2010 U.S. App. LEXIS 16680
  • 2010 WL 3168649

How courts have described this case

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

  • stating that a “protective order, like any ongoing injunction, is always subject to the inherent power of the district court” and “might be thought of as a form of injunction in . . . particular setting[s]” (internal quotation marks omitted
  • proper to file under seal documents containing “trade secrets and confidential commercial information of defendant Lilly; revelation has the potential to impinge on the company’s privacy and property rights and inflict commercial harm.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Ak

Read full opinion on CourtListener

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.