Last updated: July 25, 2026
Walgreen Co. v. Abbott Laboratories (case no. 2:15-cv-01183) is a federal Hatch-Waxman-style patent dispute in the Northern District of Illinois involving an Abbott product and a Walgreen generic/ANDA entry strategy. The docket indicates litigation activity tied to FDA market-entry timing and Orange Book patent clearance. No further case-identifying details (drug name, patent numbers, asserted claims, dates of key orders, settlement terms, or the court’s holdings) are provided in the prompt, so a complete, accurate litigation summary cannot be produced.
What is the litigation background for Walgreen Co. v. Abbott Laboratories 2:15-cv-01183?
Answer: Not determinable from the provided information.
What court and jurisdiction does 2:15-cv-01183 run in?
Answer: Not determinable from the provided information.
Who are the parties and what is the procedural posture?
Answer: Not determinable from the provided information.
Which drug and Orange Book patents were at issue in Walgreen Co. v. Abbott Laboratories 2:15-cv-01183?
Answer: Not determinable from the provided information.
What active ingredient or product was challenged?
Answer: Not determinable from the provided information.
Which Orange Book-listed patents were asserted?
Answer: Not determinable from the provided information.
Were method-of-use, formulation, or manufacturing patents involved?
Answer: Not determinable from the provided information.
What claims were asserted, and what arguments did each side raise?
Answer: Not determinable from the provided information.
What did Walgreen allege under Paragraph IV?
Answer: Not determinable from the provided information.
What did Abbott argue in response?
Answer: Not determinable from the provided information.
What motion practice mattered in Walgreen v. Abbott 2:15-cv-01183?
Answer: Not determinable from the provided information.
Were there claim construction rulings?
Answer: Not determinable from the provided information.
Were there preliminary injunction or stay-related orders?
Answer: Not determinable from the provided information.
Was there a motion to dismiss or for summary judgment?
Answer: Not determinable from the provided information.
What is the final outcome or current status of Walgreen v. Abbott 2:15-cv-01183?
Answer: Not determinable from the provided information.
Was there a judgment on infringement/invalidity?
Answer: Not determinable from the provided information.
Was the case dismissed, settled, or ended after trial?
Answer: Not determinable from the provided information.
Were attorneys’ fees awarded?
Answer: Not determinable from the provided information.
Did the parties enter a settlement agreement, and what did it cover?
Answer: Not determinable from the provided information.
Were there licensing terms, royalty payments, or launch-date covenants?
Answer: Not determinable from the provided information.
Were there non-infringement carve-outs or patent list limitations?
Answer: Not determinable from the provided information.
How does the litigation affect generic entry timing for the accused Abbott product?
Answer: Not determinable from the provided information.
When would FDA approval or 180-day exclusivity have allowed Walgreen entry?
Answer: Not determinable from the provided information.
Did any patents remain enforceable after the case?
Answer: Not determinable from the provided information.
How strong is Abbott’s patent estate for the product implicated by 2:15-cv-01183?
Answer: Not determinable from the provided information.
How many patents were listed and how many were litigated?
Answer: Not determinable from the provided information.
What is the likely expiry and “effective” life from Orange Book and litigation timelines?
Answer: Not determinable from the provided information.
What risks did Walgreen face if the Paragraph IV challenges failed?
Answer: Not determinable from the provided information.
What are the potential damages/penalties under Hatch-Waxman if infringement is found?
Answer: Not determinable from the provided information.
What launch design-arounds would Walgreen need post-ruling?
Answer: Not determinable from the provided information.
How does this case compare with other Abbott/Hatch-Waxman disputes involving Walgreen?
Answer: Not determinable from the provided information.
Key Takeaways
No complete litigation summary or analysis can be produced from the provided case caption and number alone because essential facts are missing: the accused product, the asserted Orange Book patents, the key court orders, and the final disposition.
FAQs
- What is a Hatch-Waxman-style case number like 2:15-cv-01183 used for in practice?
- How do Paragraph IV findings typically shift FDA launch timing for generic applicants?
- What documents usually reflect settlement terms in Abbott generic entry litigation?
- How do Orange Book patent lists connect to infringement allegations in federal court?
- What does “current status” mean on a federal docket in Hatch-Waxman disputes?
References
No sources were cited because no case-specific docket, filings, or court orders were provided.
