Hikma Pharmaceuticals USA Inc. v. Amarin Pharma, Inc. · ¶41

For the reasons we've explained, Amarin has failed to state a claim for active inducement in violation of § 271(b), so its complaint cannot withstand Hikma's Rule 12(b)(6) motion. We therefore reverse the judgment of the Federal Circuit and remand the case for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.

preliminary print (page proof)
Source edition
Passage preview. Read in context for the complete text, notes and references.