News & Analysis as of

Patents Teva Pharmaceuticals Patent Litigation

McDermott Will & Emery

European Commission Fines Teva €462.6 Million for Misusing Divisional patents and Disparaging Generic Competitors in the Copaxone...

McDermott Will & Emery on

On October 31, 2024, the European Commission (the Commission) delivered its long-awaited decision in the Teva Copaxone case (which was published on April 8, 2025). Teva, a global pharmaceutical company, was fined EUR 462.6...more

Venable LLP

FDA Accepts EYLEA® Biosimilar Application for Alvotech / Teva’s AVT06

Venable LLP on

On February 18, 2025, Alvotech and Teva announced the FDA acceptance of an aBLA for AVT06 (aflibercept), a proposed biosimilar of Regeneron’s EYLEA® (aflibercept). This aBLA joins Celltrion’s CT-P42 (aflibercept) awaiting...more

Fish & Richardson

Recent Decisions and FTC Challenges Dictate Caution When Listing Patents in the Orange Book

Fish & Richardson on

In October 2023, Teva Pharmaceuticals filed a patent infringement lawsuit against Amneal Pharmaceuticals alleging that their generic version of Teva’s ProAir® HFA inhaler infringed upon the asserted claims of U.S. Patent Nos....more

Robins Kaplan LLP

Janssen Pharms., Inc. v. Teva Pharms. USA, Inc.

Robins Kaplan LLP on

Invega Sustenna® (paliperidone palmitate) - Case Name: Janssen Pharms., Inc. v. Teva Pharms. USA, Inc., Civ. Nos. 18-734, 19-16484, 2024 WL 5135666 (D.N.J. Dec. 17, 2024) (Cecchi, J.)  Drug Product and Patent(s)-in-Suit:...more

WilmerHale

Federal Circuit Patent Watch: Orange Book Patents Can Be Delisted If They Do Not Claim Active Ingredient

WilmerHale on

Precedential and Key Federal Circuit Opinions - TEVA BRANDED PHARMACEUTICAL PRODUCTS R&D, INC. v. AMNEAL PHARMACEUTICALS OF NEW YORK, LLC [OPINION] (2024-1936, 12/20/2024) (Prost, Taranto, Hughes) - Prost, J. The...more

Womble Bond Dickinson

Unexpected Results in Hatch Waxman Litigation: A Review of Legal Decisions from 2023

Womble Bond Dickinson on

Patent owners generally look to secondary indicia to bolster their nonobvious defenses when prior art and/or knowledge of a person of ordinary skill in the art (“POSA”) seem to make the obviousness decision a close call. This...more

Robins Kaplan LLP

Teva Branded Pharm. Products R&D, Inc. v. Deva Holding A.S. - ProAir® HFA (albuterol sulfate)

Robins Kaplan LLP on

Case Name: Teva Branded Pharm. Products R&D, Inc. v. Deva Holding A.S., Civ. No. 24-4404 (SRC), 2024 WL 3966314 (D.N.J. Aug. 28, 2024) (Chesler, J.)....more

A&O Shearman

New Jersey District Court Orders Delisting Of Teva Inhaler Patents From The Orange Book

A&O Shearman on

On June 10, 2024, Judge Stanley R. Chesler of the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey granted the Amneal defendants’ motion for partial judgment on their counterclaims in a Hatch-Waxman dispute, and...more

Bradley Arant Boult Cummings LLP

Spring Has Sprung Obviousness Trends from the Federal Circuit

There have been only a few precedential decisions from the Federal Circuit related to obviousness since spring sprung. While these decisions have produced mixed results for the lower courts, clinical study protocols have held...more

Schwabe, Williamson & Wyatt PC

Latest Federal Court Cases - April 2024 #2

Janssen Pharms., Inc. et al. v. Teva Pharm. USA, Inc. et al., Appeal Nos. 2022-1258, -1307 (Fed. Cir. April 1, 2024) In this week’s Case of the Week, the Federal Circuit vacated-in-part a district court’s bench trial...more

Robins Kaplan LLP

Vanda Pharms. Inc. v. Teva Pharms. USA, Inc. Hetlioz® (Tasimelteon)

Robins Kaplan LLP on

Case Name: Vanda Pharms. Inc. v. Teva Pharms. USA, Inc., No. 2023-1247, 2023 WL 3335538 (Fed. Cir. May 10, 2023)(Circuit Judges Dyk, Bryson, and Prost presiding; Opinion by Dyk, J.) (Appeal from D. Del., Connolly, J.)....more

Goodwin

Formycon/Fresenius Kabi and Samsung Bioepis Settlements with J&J and Janssen Biotech regarding Ustekinumab

Goodwin on

On August 7, 2023, Formycon AG and Fresenius Kabi announced that they have reached a settlement with Johnson & Johnson (“J&J”) in the United States relating to FYB202, a proposed ustekinumab biosimilar to STELARA®, marketed...more

Axinn, Veltrop & Harkrider LLP

Axinn IP Update: District of Delaware Magistrate Judge Recommends Dismissal of Claims of Induced Infringement in Skinny Label Case

In the first decision to issue following the Supreme Court’s denial of certiorari in Teva Pharms. USA, Inc. v. GlaxoSmithKline, LLC, 22-37, Magistrate Judge Sherry R. Fallon of the United States District Court for the...more

A&O Shearman

SCOTUS denies cert in skinny label appeal from the Federal Circuit

A&O Shearman on

On May 15, 2023, the Supreme Court of the United States denied Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc.’s (“Teva”) petition for certiorari in Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc. v. GlaxoSmithKline, LLC, ending a nearly nine-year court...more

Foley Hoag LLP

The Fate of the Skinny Label: Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc. v. GlaxoSmithKline LLC

Foley Hoag LLP on

On May 15, 2023, the Supreme Court denied certiorari in Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc. v. GlaxoSmithKline LLC et al., a case some argued had enormous implications for so-called “skinny labeling” practices amongst generic drug...more

Robins Kaplan LLP

Vanda Pharms. Inc. v. Teva Pharms. USA, Inc. Hetlioz® (Tasimelteon)

Robins Kaplan LLP on

Case Name: Vanda Pharms. Inc. v. Teva Pharms. USA, Inc., Nos. 22-7528, 22-7529 (CCC), 2023 WL 1883357 (D.N.J. Feb. 10, 2023) (Cecchi, J.) - Drug Products and Patent(s)-in-Suit: Hetlioz® (tasimelteon); U.S. Patent No....more

Knobbe Martens

When an Unmet Need May Not Be Enough

Knobbe Martens on

ADAPT PHARMA OPERATIONS LTD. V. TEVA PHARMS. USA, INC. Before Newman, Prost, and Stoll. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey. Summary: Recent attempts by competitors to achieve...more

WilmerHale

Federal Circuit Patent Watch - December 2021 #2

WilmerHale on

Precedential Federal Circuit Opinions - TEVA PHARMACEUTICALS USA v. CORCEPT THERAPEUTICS, INC. [OPINION] (2021-1360, 12/07/2021) (MOORE, NEWMAN, and REYNA) -   Moore, C.J. The Court affirmed the PTAB’s IPR decision...more

Knobbe Martens

Limitations in Claim Language Frame Reasonable Expectation of Success Analysis

Knobbe Martens on

TEVA PHARMACEUTICALS USA, INC., v. CORCEPT THERAPEUTICS, INC. Before Moore, Newman, and Reyna. Appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Summary: Limitations, such as specific drug doses, in claim language can...more

Smart & Biggar

PM(NOC) Regulations: Fourth year following major amendments

Smart & Biggar on

September 21, 2021 marked the fourth anniversary of the significant amendments to the Patented Medicines (Notice of Compliance) Regulations (Regulations). This article provides an update on activities in the fourth year...more

Knobbe Martens

Federal Circuit Review - August 2021

Knobbe Martens on

It’s No Secret That a Related Company’s Physical Presence in a Jurisdiction May Not Be Enough For Proper Venue - In Andra Group, LP v. Victoria’s Secret Stores, LLC, Appeal No. 20-2009, The Federal Circuit held that an...more

Kilpatrick

Federal Circuit Decides Teva-Lilly Spat for Antibody Compositions and Methods

Kilpatrick on

On August 16, 2021, the Federal Circuit handed down two rulings related to patents issued to Teva, which involve therapeutic antibodies targeting a calcitonin gene-related peptide (“CGRP”). In both cases, the Federal Circuit...more

Proskauer - The Patent Playbook

GSK v. Teva: Federal Circuit Issues New Opinion Analyzing Induced Infringement

On August 5, 2021, the Federal Circuit withdrew its October 2020 opinion in GSK v. Teva, summarized in this post on induced infringement of method-of-treatment claims, and issued an opinion that reiterated the prior holding...more

Knobbe Martens

The Obviousness of Preamble Limitations Can Be a Real Headache for Patent Challengers

Knobbe Martens on

ELI LILLY AND COMPANY v. TEVA PHARMACEUTICALS  - Before Lourie, Bryson and O’Malley.  Appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Summary: In claims for methods of using apparatuses or compositions, statements of...more

Knobbe Martens

Presumption of Nexus Between Claims and Commercial Products May Not Apply When Unclaimed Features Are Critical

Knobbe Martens on

TEVA PHARMACEUTICALS v. ELI LILLY AND COMPANY - Before LOURIE, BRYSON, and O’MALLEY. Appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Summary: The presumption of nexus analysis requires the fact finder to consider the...more

143 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 6

"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