By Sherri Oslick --
About
Court Report: Each week we will report briefly on recently filed
biotech and pharma cases, and a few interesting cases will be selected
for periodic monitoring.
Daiichi Sankyo Co., Ltd. et al. v. Apotex, Inc. et al.
1:09-cv-03997; filed July 2, 2009 in the Northern District of Illinois
Daiichi Sankyo Co. Ltd. et al. v. Apotex Inc. et al.
1:09-cv-00470; filed June 26, 2009 in the District Court of Delaware
• Plaintiffs: Daiichi Sankyo Co. Ltd.; Daiichi Sankyo, Inc.
• Defendants: Apotex Inc.; Apotex Corp.
The complaints in these cases are substantially identical. Infringement of U.S. Patent No. 5,340,821 ("Composition and Method for Treating Sjoegren Syndrome Disease," issued August 23, 1994) following a Paragraph IV certification as part of Apotex's filing of an ANDA to manufacture a generic version of Daiichi's Evoxac® (cevimeline hydrochloride, used to treat symptoms of dry mouth in patients with Sjogren's Syndrome). View the Delaware complaint here.
Alcon Research Ltd. v. Par Pharmaceutical Inc.
1:09-cv-00481; filed July 1, 2009 in the District Court of Delaware
Infringement of U.S. Patent Nos. 5,510,383 ("Use of Cloprostenol, Fluprostenol and Their Salts and Esters to Treat Glaucoma and Ocular Hypertension," issued April 23, 1996), 5,631,287 ("Storage-Stable Prostaglandin Compositions," issued May 20, 1997), 5,849,792 (same title, issued December 15, 1998), 5,889,052 ("Use of Cloprostenol and Fluprostenol Analogues to Treat Glaucoma and Ocular Hypertension," issued March 30, 1999), 6,011,062 ("Storage-Stable Prostaglandin Compositions," issued January 4, 2000), 6,503,497 ("Use of Borate-Polyol Complexes in Ophthalmic Compositions," issued January 7, 2003), and 6,849,253 (same title, issued February 1, 2005) following a Paragraph IV certification as part of Par's filing of an ANDA to manufacture a generic versions of Alcon's Travatan® and Travatan Z® (travoprost ophthalmic solution, used to reduce elevated intraocular pressure in patients with open-angle glaucoma or ocular hypertention). View the complaint here.
Bayer Schering Pharma AG et al. v. Teva Pharmaceuticals USA Inc. et al.
1:09-cv-00480; filed July 1, 2009 in the District Court of Delaware
• Plaintiffs: Bayer Schering Pharma AG; Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals Inc.; Schering Corp.
• Defendants: Teva Pharmaceuticals USA Inc.; Teva Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd.
Infringement of U.S. Patent No. 6,362,178 ("2-phenyl Substituted Imidazotriazinones as Phosphodiesterase Inhibitors," issued March 26, 2002) following a Paragraph IV certification as part of Teva's filing of an ANDA to manufacture a generic version of plaintiffs' Levitra® (vardenafil hydrochloride, used to treat erectile dysfunction). View the complaint here.
Apotex Inc v. Eisai Inc. et al.
1:09-cv-00477; filed July 1, 2009 in the Middle District of North Carolina
• Plaintiff: Apotex Inc.
• Defendants: Eisai Inc.; Eisai Co., Ltd.
Declaratory judgment of non-infringement of U.S. Patent Nos. 5,985,864 ("Polymorphs Of Donepezil Hydrochloride and Process for Production," issued November 16, 1999), 6,140,321 (same title, issued October 31, 2000), 6,245,911 ("Donepezil Polycrystals and Process for Producing the Same," issued June 12, 2001), and 6,372,760 ("Stabilized Composition Comprising Antidementia Medicament," issued April 16, 2002) in conjunction with Apotex's filing of an ANDA to manufacture a generic version of Eisai's Aricept® (donepezil hydrochloride, used in the treatment of mild to severe dementia of the Alzheimer's type). View the complaint here.
Max-Planck-Gesellschaft zur Frderung der Wissenschaften e.V. et al. v. Whitehead Institute for Biomedical Research et al.
1:09-cv-11116; removed July 1, 2009 to the District Court of Massachusetts
• Plaintiffs: Max-Planck-Gesellschaft zur Frderung der Wissenschaften e.V.; Max-Planck-Innovation GmbH; Alnylam Pharmaceuticals, Inc.
• Defendants: Whitehead Institute for Biomedical Research; Massachusetts Institute of Technology; Board of Trustees of the University of Massachusetts
Various claims, including breach of contract and negligence, for misappropriation of "Tuschl II" inventions and inappropriate patent prosecution of "Tuschl I" inventions related to RNAi. Removed from state court; view the original complaint (filed June 26, 2009) here.
Novartis AG v. Doll
1:09-cv-01202; filed June 30, 2009 in the District Court of the District of Columbia
Review and correction of the patent term adjustment calculation made by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office for U.S. Patent No. 7,473,761 ("Somatostatin Analogues," issued January 6, 2009). View the complaint here.
Novartis AG v. Doll
1:09-cv-01203; filed June 30, 2009 in the District Court of the District of Columbia
Review and correction of the patent term adjustment calculation made by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office for U.S. Patent No. 7,470,709 ("Benzimidazole Quinolinones and Uses Thereof," issued December 30, 2008). View the complaint here.
Alzheimer's Institute of America, Inc. v. Pfizer, Inc.
4:09-cv-01026; filed June 30, 2009 in the Eastern District of Missouri
Infringement of U.S. Patent Nos. 5,455,169 ("Nucleic Acids for Diagnosing and Modeling Alzheimer's Disease" issued October 3, 1995), 5,795,963 ("Amyloid Precursor Protein in Alzheimer's Disease," issued August 18, 1998), and 6,818,448 ("Isolated Cell Comprising HAPP 6701671 DNAS Sequences" issued November 16,2004) based on Pfizer's use of the patented technology in its Alzheimer's Disease research program and drug development pipeline. View the complaint here.
Arena Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. Doll
1:09-cv-01166; filed June 26, 2009 in the District Court of the District of Columbia
Review and correction of the patent term adjustment calculation made by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office for U.S. Patent No. 7,470,699 ("Trisubstituted Aryl and Heteroaryl Derivatives as Modulators of Metabolism and the Prophylaxis and Treatment of Disorders Related Thereto," issued December 30, 2008). View the complaint here.
Reckitt Benckiser Inc. et al. v. Tris Pharma, Inc.
3:09-cv-03125; filed June 26, 2009 in the District Court of New Jersey
• Plaintiffs: Reckitt Benckiser Inc.; UCB Manufacturing, Inc.
• Defendant: Tris Pharma, Inc.
Infringement of U.S. Patent No. 5,980,882 ("Drug-resin Complexes Stabilized by Chelating Agents," issued November 9, 1999) following a Paragraph IV certification as part of Tris' filing of an ANDA to manufacture a generic version of Reckitt Benckiser's Delsym® extended release liquid suspension (dextromethorphan polistirex, used to temporarily relieve cough due to minor throat and bronchial irritation). View the complaint here.
Public Patent Foundation, Inc. v. Glaxosmithkline Consumer Healthcare, L.P.
1:09-cv-05881; filed June 26, 2009 in the Southern District of New York
False marking based on GSK's marking of certain Citrucel® products indicating that these products are covered by certain of U.S. Patent Nos. 4,626,287 ("Process for Preparing Sucrose Encrusted Methylcellulose Particles for Use In Bulk Laxative Compositions," issued December 2, 1986), 4,671,823 ("Sucrose Encrusted Methyl Cellulose Particles for Use In Bulk Laxative Compositions," issued June 9, 1987), and 4,732,917 ("Process For Preparing Sucrose Encrusted Methylcellulose Particles for Use In Bulk Laxative Compositions," issued March 22, 1988), which are expired. View the complaint here.
Dey LP et al. v. Teva Parenteral Medicines Inc. et al.
1:09-cv-00467; filed June 25, 2009 in the District Court of Delaware
• Plaintiffs: Dey, L.P.; Dey, Inc.
• Defendants: Teva Parenteral Medicines, Inc.; Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc.; Teva Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd.
Infringement of U.S. Patent Nos. 6,667,344 ("Bronchodilating Compositions and Methods," issued December 23, 2003), 6,814,953 (same title, issued November 9, 2004), 7,348,362 ("Bronchodilating β-Angonist Composition and Methods," issued March 25, 2008), and 7,462,645 (same title, issued December 9, 2008) following a Paragraph IV certification as part of Teva's filing of an ANDA to manufacture a generic version of Dey's Perforomist® (formoterol fumarate inhalation solution, used to treat bronchoconstriction in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease). View the complaint here.
Comments