From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

CHEMI SPA v. GLAXOSMITHKLINE

United States District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania
Sep 26, 2005
Civil Action No. 04-4545 (E.D. Pa. Sep. 26, 2005)

Opinion

Civil Action No. 04-4545.

September 26, 2005


MEMORANDUM


This is an antitrust action for unlawful monopolization pursuant to § 2 of the Sherman Act and § 4 of the Clayton Act. 15 U.S.C. §§ 2, 15. Before the court is the motion of defendant GlaxoSmithKline ("GSK") for summary judgment pursuant to Rule 56 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure on the grounds that this action is barred by the applicable statute of limitations.

We are denying the motion for the reasons set forth in this court's Memorandum and Order dated February 8, 2005 in which we denied GSK's motion for judgment on the pleadings. See Chemi SpA v. GlaxoSmithKline, 356 F. Supp. 2d 495 (E.D. Pa. 2005). There we held that "an antitrust claim based on baseless litigation requires proof that the litigation was unsuccessful, which can only be determined upon the termination of the initial action." Id. at 500. Under the undisputed facts of record, GSK cannot establish that Chemi SpA's action was untimely.

ORDER

AND NOW, this day of September, 2005, for the reasons set forth in the accompanying Memorandum, it is hereby ORDERED that the motion of defendant GlaxoSmithKline for summary judgment is DENIED.


Summaries of

CHEMI SPA v. GLAXOSMITHKLINE

United States District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania
Sep 26, 2005
Civil Action No. 04-4545 (E.D. Pa. Sep. 26, 2005)
Case details for

CHEMI SPA v. GLAXOSMITHKLINE

Case Details

Full title:CHEMI SPA v. GLAXOSMITHKLINE

Court:United States District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania

Date published: Sep 26, 2005

Citations

Civil Action No. 04-4545 (E.D. Pa. Sep. 26, 2005)