Tevra Brands LLC v. Bayer HealthCare LLC

Good Law
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaJanuary 21, 20255:19-cv-04312California2,502 words

Opinion

trial_court Opinion

1 2 3 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 4 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 5 SAN JOSE DIVISION 6 7 TEVRA BRANDS LLC, Case No. 19-cv-04312-BLF

8 Plaintiff, ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF'S 9 v. MOTION FOR NEW TRIAL

10 BAYER HEALTHCARE LLC, et al., [Re: ECF No. 507] 11 Defendants.

12 13 Following trial, a jury found Plaintiff Tevra Brands LLC (“Plaintiff”) had failed to prove, 14 by a preponderance of the evidence, that the relevant antitrust market for topical flea and tick 15 medications was limited to imidacloprid topicals. ECF 485. Plaintiff moves for a new trial pursuant 16 to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 59. ECF 507. The motion is opposed by Defendant Bayer 17 Healthcare LLC (“Defendant”). ECF 516. On January 13, 2025, the Court found the Motion for 18 New Trial suitable to be determined without oral argument and vacated the January 16, 2025, 19 hearing. ECF 522. After considering the moving and responding papers and the relevant record, the 20 Court DENIES Plaintiff’s Motion for New Trial for the reasons…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.