Pfizer Inc., et al. v. Alkem Laboratories Ltd., et al., C.A. No. 13-1110- GMS (consolidated), July 21, 2015

Sleet, J. Plaintiff’s motion for JMOL is granted. Defendant’s motion for JMOL is denied

Following a bench trial on July 13 through 16, 2015, defendant challenged plaintiff’s infringement claims and both sides moved for JMOL. Defendant argued unsuccessfully that plaintiff’s expert’s testimony was improper as beyond the scope of his report in that he did not offer a standard for one of ordinary skill in the art and could therefore not offer an opinion as to the plain and ordinary meaning of the terms, and further than the expert’s testimony amounted to untimely claim construction argument.  The court found these arguments unavailing due to the fact that defendant had the opportunity to discuss this issue at the pretrial conference and waived it. The court agreed that JMOL of infringement was warranted based on the testimony of plaintiff’s expert Dr. Leonard Chyall.