Eshelman v. Puma Biotechnology, Inc.
Petition for certiorari denied on December 13, 2021
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.
| Date | Proceedings and Orders (key to color coding) |
|---|
| Aug 02 2021 | Application (21A14) for a stay of mandate, submitted to The Chief Justice. |
| Aug 04 2021 | Letter of applicant Fredric N. Eshelman filed. |
| Aug 04 2021 | UPON 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 2021 | Response to application from respondent Puma Biotechnology, Inc. filed. |
| Aug 12 2021 | Reply of applicant Fredric N. Eshelman filed. |
| Aug 13 2021 | Application (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 2021 | Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due November 19, 2021) |
| Nov 18 2021 | Waiver of right of respondent Puma Biotechnology, Inc. to respond filed. |
| Nov 23 2021 | DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 12/10/2021. |
| Dec 13 2021 | Petition DENIED. |
