About the Authors

  • The Authors and Contributors of "Patent Docs" are patent attorneys and agents, many of whom hold doctorates in a diverse array of disciplines.
2018 Juristant Badge - MBHB_165
Juristant #4 Overall Rank

E-mail Newsletter

  • Enter your e-mail address below to receive the "Patent Docs" e-mail newsletter.

Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner

Contact the Docs

Docs on Twitter


Disclaimer

  • "Patent Docs" does not contain any legal advice whatsoever. This weblog is for informational purposes only, and its publication does not create an attorney-client relationship. In addition, nothing on "Patent Docs" constitutes a solicitation for business. This weblog is intended primarily for other attorneys. Moreover, "Patent Docs" is the personal weblog of the Authors; it is not edited by the Authors' employers or clients and, as such, no part of this weblog may be so attributed. All posts on "Patent Docs" should be double-checked for their accuracy and current applicability.
Juristat_165
Juristat #8 Overall Rank

Pharma-50-transparent_216px_red

« Conference & CLE Calendar | Main | Senate Cloture Vote on H.R. 1249 Scheduled for Tuesday »

September 05, 2011

Comments

Kindly be advised that the litigation case Allergan, Inc. v. Sandoz Inc.
6:11-cv-00441; filed August 26, 2011 in the Eastern District of Texas w.r.t Infringement of U.S. Patent No. 7,851,504 ("Enhanced Bimatoprost Ophthalmic Solution," issued December 14, 2010) following a Paragraph IV certification as part of Lupin's filing of an ANDA to manufacture a generic version of Allergan's Lumigan® (0.03% bimatoprost ophthalmic solution)is not against the 0.03% strength but LUMIGAN (BIMATOPROST SOLUTION/DROPS; OPHTHALMIC 0.01%). Refer the PDF attachment.

Yes, indeed that is correct. Thank you for catching that inadvertent error on our part.

The comments to this entry are closed.

October 2019

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
    1 2 3 4 5
6 7 8 9 10 11 12
13 14 15 16 17 18 19
20 21 22 23 24 25 26
27 28 29 30 31