Search for: "Lupin Ltd."
Results 1 - 20 of 34
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
11 Sep, 2007 11:01 pm
By Kevin E. Noonan -- The contours of the Federal Circuit's obviousness jurisprudence post-KSR continued to be revealed today with the CAFC's decision in Aventis Pharma Deutschland GmbH
v. Lupin, Ltd. The Federal Circuit reversed a finding in the District Court that the Aventis claims were non-obvious, based on what...
20 Sep, 2007 10:05 pm
... Pharmaceuticals, Inc.'s (LPI) motion to dismiss an action against it and its parent, Mumbai, India-based Lupin Ltd. (Lupin), brought by pharmaceutical giant Wyeth. In reaching its decision, the District Court concluded that "when a wholly-owned U ... . 2d 484, 494 (E.D. Va.
2005). In that case, the district court found: "LPI's relationship with Lupin was that of a subsidiary of the applicant and that subsidiary
submitted the ANDA application to the FDA as agent on the foreign company's behalf." The ...
18 Dec, 2008 12:24 am
Lupin Ltd. has reported to settle all patent infringement lawsuits with Schering-Plough Corp. and Sepracor, Inc. relating anti-allergic
drug Clarinex tablets, generically known as desloratadine. Under the terms of the settlement, Lupin will be licensed Clarinex OB listed patents
and will be able to commercialize its generic Clarinex tablets on July 01, 2012 or earlier in certain circumstances. Earlier in ...
13 Feb, 2008 6:19 pm
... ANDA submission on December 14, 2007. Plaintiff is asserting infringement of the '703 patent, and is seeking to enjoin Lupin from marketing
its generic formulation before expiration of the '703 patent. Interestingly, plaintiffs also filed a concurrent lawsuit ... for the District of Columbia because they claim not to be
able to determine with certainty which one of Lupin, Inc., or Lupin Ltd. was the actual filer
of the ANDA. This move was in anticipation of a jurisdictional challenge by Lupin (see ...
22 Jan 11:57 pm
... disputes involving Indian drug manufactures. Oscient Pharmaceuticals Corp. et al. v. Lupin Ltd. et al Oscient Pharmaceuticals
Corporation, holder of the NDA license for anti-cholesterol drug ... and Ethypharm has filed a civil action for patent infringement against Pune-based Lupin Ltd. for infringement of Orange-Book listed US Patent No. 7,101,574 (" ... drug Effexor XR (generically Venlafaxine extended release). Dr.
Reddy's Laboratories Ltd. et al. v. Eli Lilly & Co Dr. Reddy's Laboratories Ltd. ...
2 Jan, 2008 9:05 pm
... , Inc. Lonza Group AG v. Northwest Biotherapeutics, Inc. F.O.B. Instruments, LTD. v. Maxi-Aids, Inc. et al Technology Patents LLC v. Deutsche Telekom ... Cadet LLC et al
Nutramax Laboratories, Inc. v. Healthy Directions, LLC et al Shire LLC v. Colony Pharmaceuticals, Inc. et al Wyeth v. Lupin Ltd. et al
Contech Stormwater Solutions Inc. v. Baysaver Technologies, Inc. et al Teva Pharmaceuticals Industries Ltd. et al v. Lupin Limited et al
Teva Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd. et al v Hetero Drugs Ltd.
17 Sep, 2007 2:00 pm
... patents. The going is getting tougher. See Aventis Pharma Deutschland Gmbh and King Pharmaceuticals, Inc., v. Lupin, Ltd. (06-1530).
In a patent infringement action concerning the pharmaceutical compound ramipril, marketed by King as a blood ... , would have been obvious over the prior art still remaining
"substantially free of other isomers." The district court held that Lupin failed to meet its burden of proof by clear and convincing evidence
that a person of ordinary skill in the art would have ...
8 Sep, 2008 4:36 am
... 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. Glaxo Group Ltd. et
al. v. Lupin Ltd. et al.1:08-cv-00551; filed August 29, 2008 in the ... . 5,859,021 ("Antiviral Combinations," issued January 12, 1999)
following a Paragraph IV certification as part of Lupin's filing of an ANDA to manufacture a generic version of Glaxo's Combivir® (lamivudine
and zidovudine, used in the ...
18 Jan 7:28 pm
... week we will report briefly on recently filed biotech and pharma cases, and a few interesting cases will be selected for periodic monitoring.Oscient Pharmaceuticals Corp. et al. v.
Lupin Ltd. et al.1:09-cv-00083; filed January 14, 2009 in the District ... Fenofibrate and the Preparation Method," issued September 5,
2006) following a Paragraph IV certification as part of Lupin's filing of an ANDA to manufacture a generic version of Oscient's Antara®
(fenofibrate, used to treat ...
3 Mar, 2008 9:27 pm
... 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); 5 ... (B.P.A.I. 2007) 7. In re Sullivan (Fed. Cir. 2007) 8. 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 Seeds, Inc. v. Monsanto Co. (D. Del. 2004)
Patent Docs also noted: ...
22 Jul, 2008 7:51 pm
... 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 the obviousness inquiry, KSR Int ... 127 S. Ct. 1727, 1739 (2007), the requisite motivation can come from any number 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 ...
25 Jul, 2008 2:11 am
... 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 the obviousness inquiry, KSR Int ... 127 S. Ct. 1727, 1739 (2007), the requisite motivation can come from any number 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 ...
11 Sep, 2007 10:31 am
Aventis Pharma & King Pharma v. Lupin Ltd. (Fed. Cir. 2007). Altace is the King/Aventis brand of ramipril - a top-selling ACE
inhibitor. The patent claims ramipril formulated "substantially free of other isomers." The district court found the patent not invalid, but only by a slim margin. On appeal the CAFC
reversed - finding the patent invalid as obvious. Prior Art: One reference ('944 patent) was filed as a continuation-in-part of an already ...
11 Sep, 2007 11:49 am
... had an increased therapeutic effect, and methods of isolating the particular desired isomer were known in the art at the time of the invention. This combination provided sufficient
"reasoning with some rational underpinning to support" a conclusion of obviousness post-KSR. More detail of Aventis Pharma Deutschland GmbH v. Lupin, Ltd. after the jump. [More]
11 Sep, 2007 10:56 pm
... as a "rigid and mandatory formula[].'" The decision had the effect of invalidating for obviousness two claims in a patent concerning a compound, ramipril, which helps people with
blood pressure problems. Aventis Pharma Deutschland GMBH v. Lupin, Ltd., Nos. 06-1530 & 06-1555 (Fed. Cir. Sept. 11, 2007). In
previous post-KSR cases, the Federal Circuit seemed coy about admitting that KSR changed the test for obviousness. But the shyness ...
12 Sep, 2007 4:59 am
In Aventis Pharma Deutschland GMBH, et al. v. Lupin, LTD., et al. (September 11, 2007), the Federal Circuit held that claims covering a
5(S) stereoisomer of ramipril in a composition substantially free of other isomers were obvious where the stereoisomer was ordinarily separable from the prior art mixture with inactive
ingredients and did not offer increased potency. According to the opinion by Circuit Judge Linn, The record suggests that when ...
16 Dec, 2008 11:47 pm
... , 501 F.3d at 1269, this court affirmed that the (+) enantiomer of citalopram would not have been obvious in light of the known racemate, when it was shown that the therapeutic
properties of the (+) enantiomer were unexpected. In contrast, in Aventis Pharma Deutschland GmbH v. Lupin, Ltd. 499 F.3d 1293, 1302
(Fed. Cir. 2007), this court held that the ramipril isomer's potency was "precisely what one would expect, as ...
6 Jan 9:14 am
... . But, since the claims in Bilski were not tied to particular hardware, the court did not consider the viability of patenting specific functions carried out by a computer. Now, how
the phrase "tied to a particular machine" will be applied to software patents. (5) Lupin Ltd
8 Mar 5:59 pm
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. Genzyme Corp. v. Lupin Ltd. et al. 1:09-cv-00147; filed March 5, 2009 in the District Court of Delaware Infringement of U.S.
Patent Nos. 5,496,545 ("Phosphate-Binding Polymers for Oral Administration," issued March 5, 1996), 5, ...
17 May 9:19 pm
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. Genzyme Corp. v. Lupin Ltd. et al. 1:09-cv-01258; filed May 14, 2009 in the District Court of Maryland Infringement of U.S.
Patent Nos. 5,496,545 ("Phosphate-Binding Polymers for Oral Administration," issued March 5, 1996), 5, ...
Search on: Blawgs.FM | BlawgSearch Google Co-op | Blawg.com | Bloglines | Feedster | Google Blog Search | Technorati | Google | MSN | Yahoo!