Search for: "ALPHAPHARM PTY. LTD."
Results 1 - 20 of 25
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
4 Jul, 2007 6:18 pm
By Donald Zuhn -- Last Thursday, the Federal Circuit upheld a judgment from a District Court that Defendant-Appellant Alphapharm Pty.,
Inc. had failed to prove invalidity and unenforceability of claims 1, 2, and 5 of U.S. Patent No. 4,687,777 (the '777 patent). Specifically, the Federal Circuit held that the
District...
11 Dec, 2008 8:03 am
... Takeda prevailed in paragraph IV filings. Takeda Chem. Indus., Ltd. v. Alphapharm Pty., Ltd., 492 F.3d 1350 (Fed. Cir.
2007); Takeda ... under 271(e)(4) for fees as an exceptional case, contending that Mylan and Alphapharm each lacked a good faith basis for
their Paragraph IV letters. (In passing ... expert emphatically disagreed with the assertion that benzene and pyridine rings are bioisosteres; and Alphapharm's expert testified that the properties of compound 14 taught nothing with respect to pyridines ...
17 Dec, 2008 5:54 am
... by Defendants-Appellants Mylan Laboratories, Inc., Mylan Pharmaceuticals, Inc., and UDL Laboratories, Inc. (Mylan) on the one hand, and Defendants-Appellants Alphapharm Pty., Inc. and Genpharm, Inc. (Alphapharm) on the other. Seeking approval to market a generic
version of the antidiabetic agent, 5-{4-[2-(5-ethyl-2-pyridyl)ethoxy]benzyl}-2,4-thiazolidinedione, commonly referred to as pioglitazone, both...
2 May, 2008 7:00 am
... drug Lantus in India: (Spicy IP), Lexapro (Escitalopram) - Australia: The patentability of enantiomers: Alphapharm Pty Ltd v
H Lundbeck A/S: (IPRoo), (IP Down Under), Lipitor ( ... (Spicy IP), Court settles mischief of trade mark trafficking: Marc Enterprises Pvt Ltd v Five Star Electricals (India):
(International Law Office) Japan Japan Fair ... marks containing the word Sabatier: Rousselon Freres et Cie v Horwood Homewares Ltd: (IPKat), Over next three years UK Technology
Strategy Board will have £1 ...
1 Jul, 2007 11:53 pm
In Takeda Chemical Industries, LTD., et al. v. Alphapharm PTY., LTD., et al. (June 28, 2006), the Federal Circuit held
that "in cases involving new chemical compounds, it remains necessary to identify some ... we reject the assertion that the court failed to correctly apply the law relating to prima
facie obviousness of chemical compounds. Because Alphapharm's obviousness argument rested entirely on the court making a preliminary finding
that the prior art would have led to the selection of compound ...
17 Jun 3:02 am
... Court confirms enantiomers patentable for 20 year term: H Lundbeck A/S & Anor v Alphapharm Pty Ltd (Mallesons Stephen
Jaques) Levaquin (Levoflaxacin) - US: CAFC: $1,000,000 in translation costs awarded to ... Court confirms enantiomers patentable for 20 year term: H Lundbeck A/S & Anor v
Alphapharm Pty Ltd (Mallesons Stephen Jaques) Mucinex (Guaifenesin) - US: Reckitt Benckiser files patent infringement suit
against Watson Lab's following ANDA to manufacture generic Mucinex (Patent Docs) ...
17 Jun 3:02 am
... Court confirms enantiomers patentable for 20 year term: H Lundbeck A/S & Anor v Alphapharm Pty Ltd (Mallesons Stephen
Jaques) Levaquin (Levoflaxacin) - US: CAFC: $1,000,000 in translation costs awarded to ... Court confirms enantiomers patentable for 20 year term: H Lundbeck A/S & Anor v
Alphapharm Pty Ltd (Mallesons Stephen Jaques) Mucinex (Guaifenesin) - US: Reckitt Benckiser files patent infringement suit
against Watson Lab's following ANDA to manufacture generic Mucinex (Patent Docs) ...
9 Jul, 2007 3:49 am
... complying with MPEP § 2163.04(I)(B), sets forth a sufficient prima facie basis for a rejection due to lack of written description Takeda Chemical Industries, LTD., et al. v.
Alphapharm PTY., LTD., et al. (06/28/2007): appeal of decision that patent-in- ... case of obviousness"; detailed application of
KSR; conclusion that the district court did not err in holding that Alphapharm failed to establish a prima facie case of obviousness; "one who
claims a compound, per se, which is ...
9 Dec, 2008 5:32 pm
... which had sued two generic drug companies -- Mylan Laboratories and Alphapharm Pty. Ltd. -- for patent infringement. The
generic drug companies had sought approval to produce generic ... for their certification filings and had engaged in litigation misconduct. The court ordered Alphapharm to pay $5.4 million and Mylan to pay $11.4 million. ... of attorney fees and related expenses." Takeda Industries v. Mylan and Alphapharm, nos. 2007-1269, 1270. The panel also found "unpersuasive" an argument by both ...
13 May 11:44 pm
... establish prima facie obviousness of a new claimed compound." Takeda Chem. Indus., Ltd. v. Alphapharm Pty., Ltd., 492
F.3d 1350, 1357 (Fed. Cir. 2007). The use of unexpected results arises: If a patent challenger makes a prima facie showing of obviousness, the ... , 492 F.3d at 1359; see also Eisai Co.
Ltd. v. Dr. Reddy's Labs., Ltd., 533 F.3d 1353, 1359 (Fed. Cir. 2008) ... claimed compound and the prior art compound[]." Eisai Co. Ltd. v. Dr. Reddy's Labs.,
Ltd., 533 F.3d 1353, 1356-57 (Fed. Cir ...
24 Jun 10:17 am
A recent decision of an Australian appeal court concerning a patent for an enantiomer pharmaceutical dealt with matters of patent claim validity and patent term extension. The decision,
H Lundbeck A/S v Alphapharm Pty Ltd [2009] FCAFC 70, involves a decision of the Full Federal Court on rehearing an appeal by
Alphapharm over an earlier decision regarding Lundbeck's Australian Patent No. 623144 for the antidepressant drug escitalopram. The Full Court
...
3 Mar, 2008 9:27 pm
... The eleven cases are: 1. Pharmastem Therapeutics, Inc. v. Viacell, Inc. (Fed. Cir. 2007) 2. Pfizer, Inc. v. Apotex, Inc. (Fed. Cir. 2007) 3. Takeda Chem. Indus., Ltd. v.
Alphapharm Pty., Ltd. (Fed. Cir. 2007) 4. McNeil-PPC, Inc. v. Perrigo, Co. (S.D.N.Y. 2007 ... . Daiichi Sankyo Co. v. Apotex,
Inc. (Fed. Cir. 2007) 9. Aventis Pharma Deutschland GmbH v. Lupin, Ltd. (Fed. Cir. 2007) 10. Forest Labs., Inc. v. Ivax Pharm., Inc. (Fed. Cir. 2007) 11. Syngenta ...
27 Sep 5:13 pm
... involving lawyers from Akin Gump or Howe & Russell (listed without regard to likelihood of being granted): Docket: 08-1461; 08-1463 Title: Mylan Laboratories, Inc., et al. v.
Takeda Chemical Industries, Ltd., et al. ; Alphapharm Pty., Ltd., et al. v. Takeda Chemical Industries, Ltd., et
al.Issue: Does 35 U.S.C. § 285 permit the imposition of a ten-million-dollar attorney-fee award based substantially on (i) a generic drug maker' ...
10 Mar, 2007 7:25 am
... be overcome by evidence of fraud, misrepresentation, intimidation or malice); Freemen Mgmt. Corp. v. Shurgard Storage Centers, Ltd., No. 3:06cv0736, 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS
82304, *30 n.5 (M.D. Tenn ... 15, 2006) (where a defendant has an economic interest in the contract, showing of malicious, criminal or fraudulent conduct may provide basis for liability
for tortious interference); Smithkline Beecham Corp. v. Alphapharm PTY, Ltd., 383 F. Supp. 2d 686, 704 (E.D. Penn. 2004)
(competitors' privilege to ...
28 Jun, 2007 9:36 pm
Today the Federal Circuit affirmed a bench trial judgment that the obviousness doctrine didn't invalidate patent claims relating to antidiabetic agents. Although the judgment predated
KSR Int'l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 127 S. Ct. 1727 (2007), the court held that it it applied correct principles in analyzing the obviousness question. Takeda Chemical Industries,
Ltd. v. Alphapharm Pty., Ltd., No. 06-1329 (Fed. Cir. June 28, 2007). Barry Barnett We used a big one this time.
29 Jun, 2007 11:38 am
... . The decision provides some guidance as to how the Federal Circuit will apply KSR v. Teleflex when dealing with the question of obviousness in structurally similar chemical
compounds, and it appears that the previous Federal Circuit law on the issue has survived KSR. More details on Takeda Chem. Indus. Ltd. v. Alphapharm Pty., Ltd. after the jump. [More]
12 Jul, 2007 12:35 am
Case: Takeda Chem. Indus., Ltd. v. Alphapharm Pty., Ltd., No. 06-1329 (Fed. Cir. 6/28/07) The One Sentence Summary: An
anti-diabetes drug patent was not obvious even though it was structurally similar to a molecule in the prior art. What They Were Fighting About: Defendant argued that a patented
anti-diabetes compound was obvious because it was similar in structure to a compound in the prior art. Federal Circuit Holdings: The district court did not ...
12 Jul, 2007 6:45 am
Daiichi Sankyo Co., Ltd. v. Apotex, Inc. (06-1564) July 11, 2007 (non-precedential) Daiichi held a patent drawn to a method for treating bacterial ear infections by topically
administering the ... Omegaflex, Inc. v. Parker-Hannifin - reversed SJ of non-obviousness Takeda Chemical Indus. v. Alphapharm Pty.,
Ltd. - affirming non-obviousness Frazier v. Layne Christensen Co. - affirming JMOL on obviousness Pharmastem Therapeutics, Inc. v. Viacell, Inc. - reversing jury verdict and JMOL
of non-obviousness
22 Jul, 2008 7:51 pm
... of ordinary skill in the art to select and then modify a known compound (i.e. a lead compound) in a particular way to achieve the claimed compound. See Takeda Chem. Indus. v.
Alphapharm Pty., Ltd., 492 F.3d 1350, 1356 (Fed. Cir. 2007). In keeping with the flexible nature of ... of sources and need not
necessarily be explicit in the art. See Aventis Pharma Deutschland GmbH v. Lupin, Ltd., 499 F.3d 1293, 1301 (Fed. Cir. 2007). Rather "it is sufficient to show that the claimed
...
18 May 7:00 am
In a decision Wednesday, the Federal Circuit affirmed a district court's determination that the asserted claims in a pharmaceutical patent were not proven obvious. As is common in
pharmaceutical cases, the defendant filed an ANDA asserting the patent covering the compound and its use was invalid, and in the ensuing infringement suit admitted its proposed generic
drug met the claim limitations. The district court specifically held the prior art did not suggest the closes prior art compound as a ...
Search on: Blawgs.FM | BlawgSearch Google Co-op | Blawg.com | Bloglines | Feedster | Google Blog Search | Technorati | Google | MSN | Yahoo!