News & Analysis as of

ANDA Patents

Angiomax Patents Limited To Example

by Foley & Lardner LLP on

In The Medicines Co. v. Mylan, Inc., the Federal Circuit construed composition claims of two Angiomax patents as requiring the recited “batches” to be made by a specific “efficient mixing” process illustrated in one of the...more

Federal Circuit Limits Claim to Single Embodiment Because Only Enabling Description Provided in the Patent

On April 6, 2017, the Federal Circuit reversed-in-part and affirmed-in-part the district court’s judgment of infringement and summary judgment for non-infringement of The Medicines Company’s (“MedCo”) patents-in-suit. See The...more

The Medicines Company v. Mylan, Inc. (Fed. Cir. 2017)

The Federal Circuit returned to its consideration of the outcome in the District Court of The Medicines Company's ANDA litigation against Mylan and Bioniche Pharma over a proposed generic version of Medicines' bivalirudin...more

Novartis v. Noven: The PTAB is not Bound by Prior Decisions of District Courts

Novartis, together with LTS Lohmann Therapie-Systeme, owns a pair of patents covering rivastigmine transdermal patches. These patches are useful for treating Alzheimer’s disease. Noven Pharmaceuticals filed an abbreviated new...more

Markush Madness: Watson Avoids Infringement by Adding an Element to a Formulation

by K&L Gates LLP on

On February 1, 2017, in Shire Development, LLC v. Watson Pharmaceuticals, Inc., the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit held that Watson’s proposed generic version of Shire’s LIALDA® did not infringe claims 1 and 3...more

Structurally and Functionally Related Excipient Not Within Asserted Claim’s Markush Group

by McDermott Will & Emery on

The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit reversed a district court’s judgment of infringement, finding that the accused product contained an excipient not within the asserted claim’s closed Markush group. Shire Dev.,...more

ANDA Update - March 2017 Volume 3, Number 1

by McDermott Will & Emery on

Speculative Evidence of Irreparable Harm Sinks Bayer's Request for Permanent Injunction - Bayer Pharma AG, et al. v. Watson Laboratories, Inc. (D. Del. December 28, 2016) - Applying the eBay factors to Plaintiff...more

Speculation That FDA May Require a Formulation Change ≠ Infringement

by Locke Lord LLP on

Last month, we reported on the District of Delaware’s decision in Bayer Pharma AG et al. v. Watson Laboratories, Inc., C.A. No. 12-1726-LPS, 2016 WL 7468172 (D. Del. Dec. 28, 2016) which held that speculation of a...more

Federal Circuit Finds "Consisting Of" Requires Reversing Infringement Of Shire Lialda Patent

by Foley & Lardner LLP on

The Federal Circuit focused on the “consisting of” language in the claims at issue when it reversed the district court’s finding that Watson’s ANDA product would infringe the only Orange Book-listed Shire Lialda patent. In so...more

Shire Development LLC v. Watson Pharmaceuticals Inc. (Fed. Cir. 2017)

The Federal Circuit, in its third opinion involving ANDA litigation between these parties over Shire's LIALDA® (mesalamine) product, has apparently brought this case to a close in generic drug maker Watson's favor, in a...more

Second Circuit Declares That, to Survive Motions to Dismiss, Antitrust Allegations Require Factual Support for All “Necessary...

Last Wednesday, the Second Circuit Court of Appeals partially vacated the judgment of the district court in In re Actos End-Payor Antitrust Litigation. In doing so, the Second Circuit allowed only plaintiffs’ claims that...more

Endo Pharms. Inc. v. Amneal Pharms. LLC

by Robins Kaplan LLP on

Case Name: Endo Pharms. Inc. v. Amneal Pharms. LLC, Civ Nos. 14-1382-RGA, 14-1389-RGA, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 140112 (D. Del. Oct. 7, 2016) (Andrews, J.). Drug Product and Patent(s)-in-Suit: Opana® ER (oxymorphone...more

Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp. v. Hospira Inc.

by Robins Kaplan LLP on

Case Name: Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp. v. Hospira Inc., 14-cv-915-RGA, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 139721 (D. Del. Oct. 7, 2016) (Andrews, J.). Drug Product and Patent(s)-in-Suit: Invanz® (ertapenem); U.S. Patents Nos. 5,952,323...more

Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp. v. Teva Pharms. USA, Inc.

by Robins Kaplan LLP on

Case Name: Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp. v. Teva Pharms. USA, Inc., No. 14-874-SLR, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 158514 (D. Del. Nov. 16, 2016) (Robinson, J.). Drug Product and Patent(s)-in-Suit: Nasonex® (mometasone furoate...more

Federal Circuit Finds Infringement Under Akamai Of Two-Step Method Of Treatment

by Foley & Lardner LLP on

In Eli Lilly & Co. v. Teva Parenteral Medicines, Inc., the Federal Circuit affirmed the district court decision finding infringement under Akamai of a two-step method of treatment when the prescribing information for the...more

Cumberland Pharmaceuticals Inc. v. Mylan Institutional LLC (Fed. Cir. 2017)

The Federal Circuit had the opportunity to provide guidance on a question now in its twilight: what is the standard for determining who is the true inventor under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. § 102(f), in Cumberland Pharmaceuticals...more

Orexo AB v. Actavis Elizabeth LLC

by Robins Kaplan LLP on

Case Name: Orexo AB v. Actavis Elizabeth LLC, 14-cv-829-SLR, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 157683 (D. Del. Nov. 15, 2016) (Robinson, J.). Drug Product and Patents-in-Suit: Zubsolv® (buprenorphine / naloxone sublingual tablet);...more

Mylan Institutional LLC v. Aurobindo Phama Ltd

by Robins Kaplan LLP on

Case Name: Mylan Institutional LLC v. Aurobindo Phama Ltd, 2:16-cv-00491-RWS-RSP, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 180551 (E.D. Tex. Nov. 21, 2016) (Payne, MJ). Drug Product and Patents-in-Suit: isosulfan blue; U.S. Patents Nos....more

Aptalis Pharamtech, Inc. v. Apotex Inc.

by Robins Kaplan LLP on

Case Name: Aptalis Pharamtech, Inc. v. Apotex Inc., Civ. No. 14-1038-SLR, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 169520 (D. Del. Dec. 8, 2016) (Robinson, J.). Drug Product and U.S. Patent: Amrix® (cyclobenzaprine); U.S. Patents Nos....more

Roxane Labs., Inc. v. Vanda Pharms., Inc.

by Robins Kaplan LLP on

Case Name: Roxane Labs., Inc. v. Vanda Pharms., Inc., No. 16-0179, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 175785 (S.D. Ohio Dec. 20, 2016) (Marbley, J.). Drug Product and Patent(s)-in-Suit: Fanapt® (iloperidone); U.S. Patents Nos....more

Bayer Pharma AG v. Watson Labs., Inc.

by Robins Kaplan LLP on

Case Name: Bayer Pharma AG v. Watson Labs., Inc., 12-1726-LPS, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 179103 (D. Del. Dec. 28, 2016) (Stark, J.). Drug Product and Patent(s)-in-Suit: Natazia® (estradiol valerate/estradiol...more

Direct Infringement Prong of 35 U.S.C. § 271(b) in a Hatch-Waxman Case May Be Satisfied When the Prescribing Physician Directs or...

by Locke Lord LLP on

On January 12, 2017, the Federal Circuit affirmed the district court’s holding that, under Akamai Technologies, Inc. v. Limelight Networks, Inc., 797 F.3d 1020, 1022 (Fed. Cir. 2015) (en banc), the acts of patients may be...more

Endo Pharms. Inc. v. Actavis Labs. UT, Inc.

by Robins Kaplan LLP on

Case Name: Endo Pharms. Inc. v. Actavis Labs. UT, Inc., 2016-1146, 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 18490 (Fed. Cir. Oct. 14, 2016) (Circuit Judges Moore, Taranto, and Hughes presiding; Opinion by Taranto, J.) (Appeal from E.D. Tex.,...more

Copying as Objective Evidence of Non-Obviousness in ANDA Cases Is Alive and Well

Originally published in BNA’s Pharmaceutical Law & Industry Report Journal, 15 PLIR 73 - January 13th, 2017. In recent years, certain court decisions have suggested that copying is not a significant secondary...more

Speculation of ANDA Product Launch Before FDA Approval Does Not Warrant Permanent Injunction

by Locke Lord LLP on

On December 28, 2016, Judge Stark of the District of Delaware, despite having previously found infringement, held that plaintiffs Bayer Pharma AG, Bayer Intellectual Property GmbH, and Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals Inc....more

267 Results
|
View per page
Page: of 11
Cybersecurity

"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:
Sign up using*

Already signed up? Log in here

*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
*With LinkedIn, you don't need to create a separate login to manage your free JD Supra account, and we can make suggestions based on your needs and interests. We will not post anything on LinkedIn in your name. Or, sign up using your email address.
Feedback? Tell us what you think of the new jdsupra.com!