Breaking News

Eshelman v. Puma Biotechnology, Inc.

Pending petition
Docket No. Op. Below Argument Opinion Vote Author Term
21-577 4th Cir. TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD

Issue: Whether, under Unitherm Food Systems, Inc. v. Swift-Eckrich, Inc. and the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, a defendant who did not file a Rule 50 motion for judgment as a matter of law in the district court can nonetheless raise a sufficiency of the evidence challenge to damages on appeal.

SCOTUSblog Coverage

DateProceedings and Orders (key to color coding)
Aug 02 2021Application (21A14) for a stay of mandate, submitted to The Chief Justice.
Aug 04 2021Letter of applicant Fredric N. Eshelman filed.
Aug 04 2021UPON CONSIDERATION of the application of counsel for the applicant, IT IS ORDERED that the mandate of the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, case Nos. 20-1329 and 20-1376, is hereby stayed pending receipt of a response, due on or before Wednesday, August 11, 2021, by 3:00 p.m. ET, and further order of the undersigned or of the Court.
Aug 11 2021Response to application from respondent Puma Biotechnology, Inc. filed.
Aug 12 2021Reply of applicant Fredric N. Eshelman filed.
Aug 13 2021Application (21A14) denied by The Chief Justice. The order heretofore issued by The Chief Justice on August 4, 2021, is vacated. The application for a stay of mandate is, in all respects, denied.
Oct 18 2021Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due November 19, 2021)
Nov 18 2021Waiver of right of respondent Puma Biotechnology, Inc. to respond filed.
Nov 23 2021DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 12/10/2021.