News & Analysis as of

Eli Lilly

A Seismic Shift in UK Patent Infringement Law - Actavis v. Eli Lilly

In a decision that appears to have introduced a doctrine of equivalents for the first time, the UK Supreme Court has shifted the laws on patent infringement in Actavis v. Eli Lilly UK [2017] UKSC 48. While this case...more

At The Bench: 2017 Mid-Year Case Review

Impression Prods. v. Lexmark Int’l, 137 S. Ct. 1523, 581 U.S. ___ (2017) The Supreme Court held that all patent rights are exhausted upon the first sale of a patented product, regardless of where the sale is made or...more

Impact of Eli Lilly v. Teva Parenteral Medicines Inc. on Divided Infringement

The Federal Circuit in Eli Lilly v. Teva Parenteral Medicines Inc., 845 F.3d 1357 (Fed. Cir. 2017), recently addressed the issue of “divided infringement” in the context of pharmaceutical patents for the first time since its...more

UK Supreme Court Breathes New Life to the Doctrine of Equivalents

by Dorsey & Whitney LLP on

In what is perhaps the most important development in English law of the last decade in this area of interpretation of patent claims and patent infringement, the UK Supreme Court gave new life to the doctrine of equivalents in...more

Actavis v. Eli Lilly1: Back to the future - The UK Supreme Court changes the test for patent infringement

by WilmerHale on

The UK Supreme Court rarely hears patent cases, and will only hear cases that it considers to be fundamentally important. The court's July 12 judgment is most significant for changing the test for infringement in the United...more

UK Supreme Court hands down landmark ruling in favour of Eli Lilly

by Hogan Lovells on

Following last Friday’s (7 July 2017) unusual move of advance publication of the outcome of the case, the UK Supreme Court now published the reasons for its decision in the long-running Actavis v Eli Lilly case. The reasons...more

Hogan Lovells Successfully Acts for Eli Lilly in UK Supreme Court Patent Ruling

by Hogan Lovells on

In an unusual move, the UK Supreme Court (UKSC) has given its key conclusions in the long running Actavis v Eli Lilly case ahead of giving the full judgment. The UKSC allowed Eli Lilly’s appeal and held that Actavis’ products...more

Rx IP Update - May 2017

by Smart & Biggar on

Federal Court of Appeal finds that Apotex did not fail to mitigate its damages in relation to Apo-Trazodone drug submission - On April 6, 2017, the Federal Court of Appeal overturned the Federal Court’s finding that...more

Eli Lilly and Co. v. Teva Parenteral Medicines, Inc.

by Robins Kaplan LLP on

Case Name: Eli Lilly and Co. v. Teva Parenteral Medicines, Inc., No. 2015-2067, 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 555 (Fed. Cir. Jan. 12, 2017) (Circuit Judges Prost, Newman, and Dyk presiding; Opinion by Prost, C.J.) (Appeal from S.D....more

Teva awarded section 8 damages regarding pregabalin and olanzapine

by Smart & Biggar on

On March 30 and April 4, 2017, the Federal Court released two decisions on the merits under section 8 of the Patented Medicines (Notice of Compliance) Regulations (“PMNOC Regulations”) regarding pregabalin (Pfizer’s LYRICA)...more

Rx IP Update - April 2017

by Smart & Biggar on

Teva awarded section 8 damages regarding pregabalin and olanzapine - On March 30 and April 4, 2017, the Federal Court released two decisions on the merits under section 8 of the Patented Medicines (Notice of...more

Practice Tips for Patentees Asserting Method-of-Treatment Claims Involving Divided Infringement

by WilmerHale on

Do physicians ‘‘condition participation’’ of drug therapy based on patients’ compliance with drug manufacturer instructions regarding how to take drugs? Do physicians withhold medically necessary drug therapy from patients...more

Tribunal dismisses Eli Lilly’s NAFTA challenge on promise utility doctrine

by Smart & Biggar on

As previously reported, Eli Lilly submitted claims to international arbitration under the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) seeking damages from the Government of Canada, asserting that the Canadian courts'...more

Federal Circuit Vacates PTAB Claim Construction and Obviousness Conclusion in Eli Lilly’s IPR against LA BioMed

by Knobbe Martens on

The Federal Circuit held that a rat study in a provisional application and a conversion method in an uncited reference did not support the claimed human dosage form in Los Angeles Biomed. Research Inst. v. Eli Lilly & Co.,...more

Matching Claim Language with Label Language Ensnares Infringers

by Knobbe Martens on

On January 12, 2017, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit issued an opinion affirming the judgement that Eli Lilly’s U.S. Patent No. 7,772,209 (“the ’209 Patent”) was valid and infringed under the doctrine of...more

The Federal Circuit Found Direct Infringement Attributable to Physicians Where “No Single Actor Performs All Steps of a Claim"

by Miles & Stockbridge P.C. on

Can a patient’s action in taking a generic drug be attributable to a physician such that it can support a finding of the physician’s direct patent infringement? According to a recent precedential opinion of the Court of...more

Eli Lilly v. Teva – Expert Testimony and the Indefiniteness Inquiry

In the patent world, claim scope depends on the meaning given to the individual words in the claim. If the meaning of a word in the claim is not clear, the claim may be attacked as invalid under the indefiniteness standard....more

First Circuit Affirms Dismissal of FCA Off-Label Marketing Case for Failure to Meet 9(b) Particularity Requirement

by Ropes & Gray LLP on

In Lawton v. Takeda Pharmaceutical Co. et al., 842 F.3d 125 (1st Cir. 2016), the First Circuit affirmed the lower court’s dismissal of a False Claims Act (“FCA”) suit alleging a drug maker fraudulently marketed a product for...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

Eli Lilly & Co. v. Teva Parenteral Medicines, Inc. (Fed. Cir. 2017)

From the nadir of the Supreme Court's allegations that the Federal Circuit "fundamentally misunderstood" the law of inducing infringement in Limelight Networks, Inc. v. Akamai Technologies, Inc., the nation's specialized...more

Instructions Induced Prescribing Physicians to Infringe

In Eli Lilly and Company v. Teva Parenteral Medicines, Inc., [2015-2067] (January 12, 2017), the Federal Circuit affirmed judgment of inducement of infringement of U.S. Patent No. 7,772,209, and that the the asserted claims...more

RxIP Update - 2016 Year in Review

by Smart & Biggar on

The following are highlights of developments in Canadian life sciences intellectual property and regulatory law in 2016, updating our 2016 mid-year highlights. 1. Substantive patent law developments - Utility and...more

Year In Review: The Top-Five U.S. Market Developments of 2016

by Goodwin on

Here are our picks for the top-five most significant U.S. market developments in the world of biosimilars in 2016: The FDA approved three biosimilar products in 2016, compared to only one in 2015 — Sandoz’s Zarxio®, a...more

Basaglar (Insulin Glargine Injection) Launches in US

by Goodwin on

Eli Lilly and Boehringer Ingelheim announced today that their insulin glargine injection product, Basaglar® (a follow-on biologic for Sanofi’s Lantus®), is now available by prescription in the U.S. Although Basaglar is...more

Rx IP Update - November 2016

by Smart & Biggar on

Federal Court of Appeal opines on the framework for analyzing obviousness-type double-patenting - On November 4, 2016, the Federal Court of Appeal dismissed Apotex’s appeal in Apotex Inc v Eli Lilly Canada Inc, 2016 FCA...more

88 Results
|
View per page
Page: of 4
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.