IS THE A IN ANDA BEGINNING TO MEAN ANTITRUST?
Reported settlements in federal district court cases - This chart summarizes the case name, drug, patents-in-suit, and publicly available terms for reported settlements in federal district court cases that are filed pursuant...more
Tradjenta® (linagliptin) - Case Name: Boehringer Ingelheim Pharms. Inc. v. Apotex Inc., Civ. No. 23-685-CFC, 2025 WL 71979 (D. Del. Jan. 10, 2025) (Connolly, J.) Drug Product and Patent(s)-in-Suit: Tradjenta® (linagliptin);...more
Simbrinza® (brinzolamide / brimonidine) - Case Name: Alcon Inc. v. Padagis Israel Pharms. Ltd., Civ. No. 22-1422-WCB, 2025 WL 457119 (D. Del. Feb. 5, 2025) (Bryson, C.J.) Drug Product and Patent(s)-in-Suit: Simbrinza®...more
INOMax® (nitric oxide) - Case Name: Mallinckrodt Pharms. Ireland Ltd. v. Airgas Therapeutics LLC, Civ. No. 22-1648-RGA, 2025 WL 472557 (D. Del. Feb. 12, 2025) (Andrews, J.) Drug Product and Patent(s)-in-Suit: INOMax® (nitric...more
The Federal Circuit affirmed a District Court decision that the label for a generic drug obtained from an ANDA would not induce infringement by reciting optional drug storage conditions the read on the NDA holder's Orange...more
AZURITY PHARMACEUTICALS, INC. v. ALKEM LABORATORIES LTD. Before Murphy, Moore, and Chen. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Delaware. Arguments and amendments made during prosecution of a parent...more
On March 28, 2025, the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit issued an opinion affirming the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey decision that Mylan Laboratories Ltd. (“Mylan”) induced...more
Invega Trinza® (paliperidone palmitate) - Case Name: Janssen Pharms., Inc. v. Mylan Labs. Ltd., No. 2023-2042, 2025 WL 946390 (Fed. Cir. Mar. 28, 2025) (Circuit Judges Dyk, Prost, and District Judge Goldberg presiding;...more
While a Miranda warning isn’t given prior to starting substantive examination, perhaps it should be. In Azurity Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. Alkem Laboratories, Ltd., a precedential decision issued on April 8, 2025, the Federal...more
Azurity Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. Alkem Laboratories Ltd., No. 2023-1977 (Fed. Cir. (D. Del.) Apr. 8, 2025). Opinion by Murphy (sitting by designation), joined by Moore and Chen. Azurity owns a patent directed to non-sterile...more
The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed a district court’s noninfringement determination, finding that the presence of a disclaimed compound in the accused product precluded infringement. Azurity Pharm., Inc....more
Azurity Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. Alkem Laboratories Ltd., Appeal No. 2023-1977 (Fed. Cir. Apr. 8, 2025) In our Case of the Week, the Federal Circuit affirmed that defendant Alkem’s proposed generic antibiotic did not...more
In Actavis Labs. FL, Inc. v. U.S. (“Actavis”), a recent precedential decision, the Federal Circuit answered an important practical question regarding the interplay between the Hatch-Waxman Act and the Internal Revenue Code:...more
On March 17, 2025, Senators Chuck Grassley (R-IA), John Cornyn (R-TX), Richard Blumenthal (D-CT), and Richard Durbin (D-IL) re-introduced the “Affordable Prescriptions for Patients Act” (“APPA”), which previously passed the...more
The recent uptick and rise in popularity of GLP-1 drugs for addressing weight loss and obesity has led to an increase in U.S. litigation involving this class of drugs. Over the past few years, litigation has focused on a wide...more
Addressing the calculation of patent term extensions (PTEs) under the Hatch-Waxman Act, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed a district court decision that under the act the issue date of the original...more
On March 21, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit held in a precedential opinion that legal fees incurred by generic drug companies in defending against patent infringement suits brought under the Hatch-Waxman Act...more
Actavis Labs. FL, Inc. v. United States, Appeal No. 2023-1320 (Fed. Cir. Mar. 21, 2025) Our Case of the Week, in the words of its author, Circuit Judge Stark, “is not actually a patent case. It is, instead, a tax case.” In...more
In Actavis v. U.S., a case at the intersection of tax law and patent law, the Federal Circuit held that generic drug companies’ Hatch-Waxman litigation expenses are “ordinary and necessary business expenses” and can be...more
On March 13, 2025, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed a five-year patent term extension (“PTE”) for Merck’s sugammadex patent, holding that the district court had correctly calculated PTE based on the...more
Novartis markets and sells a combination therapy of valsartan and sacubitril under the brand name Entresto® for the treatment of various forms of heart failure. MSN submitted an Abbreviated New Drug Application seeking...more
A bipartisan Senate bill dubbed the “Skinny Label, Big Savings Act” was introduced in January. The bill would expand the scope of protection afforded by section viii carve-outs, a mechanism that allows Abbreviated New Drug...more
The Federal Circuit recently reversed a district court decision that found a patent that did not describe after-arising technology failed to satisfy the written description requirement. In so doing, the Federal Circuit...more
This chart summarizes the case name, presiding judge, drug, and patents-at-issue in all federal district court cases that are filed pursuant to the Hatch-Waxman Act. It also includes the same information for proceedings...more
Entresto® (sacubitril/valsartan) - Case Name: Novartis Pharms. Corp. v. Becerra, Civ. No. 24-cv-2234 (DLF), 2024 WL 4492072 (D.D.C. Oct. 15, 2024) (Friedrich, J.) Drug Product and Patent(s)-in-Suit: Entresto®...more