From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

NOVARTIS AG v. APOTEX INC

United States District Court, D. New Jersey
Feb 8, 2011
Civil Action No. 09-5614 (PGS) (D.N.J. Feb. 8, 2011)

Opinion

Civil Action No. 09-5614 (PGS).

February 8, 2011


ORDER


A Report and Recommendation was filed on January 24, 2011 recommending that this Court deny Defendants Apotex Inc. and Apotex Corp.'s ("Apotex") motion to disqualify Dr. Alexander Klibanov from serving as an expert witness on behalf of Plaintiffs (docket entry 34). Apotex also seeks to preclude Novartis from relying on Dr. Klibanov's opinions in their entirety. The parties were given notice that they had until February 7, 2011 to object to the Report and Recommendation pursuant to Local Civil Rule 72.1(c)(2). No objections having been received, and the Court having reviewed the Report and Recommendation de novo, and good cause appearing;

It is, on this 8th day of February, 2011,

ORDERED that the Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge Esther Salas at docket entry 115 is hereby adopted as the opinion of the Court; and it is further

ORDERED that Apotex's motion to disqualify Dr. Alexander Klibanov from serving as an expert witness on behalf of Plaintiffs and to preclude Novartis from relying on Dr. Kilbanov's opinion is denied.


Summaries of

NOVARTIS AG v. APOTEX INC

United States District Court, D. New Jersey
Feb 8, 2011
Civil Action No. 09-5614 (PGS) (D.N.J. Feb. 8, 2011)
Case details for

NOVARTIS AG v. APOTEX INC

Case Details

Full title:NOVARTIS AG and, NOVARTIS PHARMACEUTICALS CORPORATION Plaintiff, v. APOTEX…

Court:United States District Court, D. New Jersey

Date published: Feb 8, 2011

Citations

Civil Action No. 09-5614 (PGS) (D.N.J. Feb. 8, 2011)

Citing Cases

Fed. Trade Comm'n v. Innovative Designs, Inc.

"The objectively reasonable belief of a confidential relationship is not a 'high hurdle' for the moving party…