News & Analysis as of

Allergan Inc Allergan v Sandoz

Robins Kaplan LLP

Allergan Sales, LLC v. Sandoz, Inc.

Robins Kaplan LLP on

Case Name: Allergan Sales, LLC v. Sandoz, Inc., No. 12-cv-207-JRG, 15-cv-347-JRG, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 135088 (E.D. Tex. Sept. 30, 2016) (Gilstrap, J.) - Drug Product and Patent(s)-in-Suit: Combigan® (brimonidine...more

Robins Kaplan LLP

Allergan, Inc., v. Sandoz Inc.

Robins Kaplan LLP on

Case Name: Allergan, Inc., v. Sandoz Inc., Civ. No. 2014-1275, 2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 13616 (Fed. Cir. Aug. 4, 2015) (Circuit Judges Lourie, Linn, and Hughes presiding; Opinion by Lourie, J.) (Appeal from E.D. Tex., Schneider,...more

Foley & Lardner LLP

The Value Of Prophetic Examples

Foley & Lardner LLP on

In Allergan, Inc. v. Sandoz, Inc., the Federal Circuit affirmed the district court decision that upheld the validity of the Allergan patents relating to Lumigan® 0.01% glaucoma eye drops against obviousness, written...more

Foley & Lardner LLP

Lumigan Patents Upheld by Unexpected Results

Foley & Lardner LLP on

In Allergan, Inc. v. Sandoz, Inc., the Federal Circuit affirmed the district court decision that upheld the validity of the Allergan patents relating to Lumigan® 0.01% glaucoma eye drops. This decision shows that it is still...more

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP

Court Report - March 2015 #3

About Court Report: Each week we will report briefly on recently filed biotech and pharma cases. Otsuka Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd. v. Sandoz Inc. et al. 1:15-cv-01716; filed March 9, 2015 in the District Court of New...more

Knobbe Martens

Federal Circuit Review - Volume 3 | Issue 5 - May 2013

Knobbe Martens on

In This Issue: • Patent Office Must Prove Prior Art Reference Is Enabling • Complaint Was Adequate Despite Non-Infringing Possibilities • FDA Approval Not Relevant to Obviousness Analysis - Excerpt from...more

BakerHostetler

Patent Watch: Allergan, Inc. v. Sandoz Inc.

BakerHostetler on

On May 1, 2013, in Allergan, Inc. v. Sandoz Inc., the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (Dyk, Prost,* O'Malley) affirmed-in-part and reversed-in-part the district court's judgment that U.S. Patents No. 7,642,258,...more

7 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 1

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
- hide
- hide