Get our Free Patent Expiration Newsletter

Serving leading biopharmaceutical companies globally:

Moodys
McKesson
McKinsey
Medtronic
Dow
AstraZeneca

Last Updated: July 3, 2020

DrugPatentWatch Database Preview

Litigation Details for ALLERGAN, INC. v. APOTEX INC. (M.D.N.C. 2010)


Email this page to a colleague

» See Plans and Pricing

« Back to Dashboard

ALLERGAN, INC. v. APOTEX INC. (M.D.N.C. 2010)

Docket   Start Trial Date Filed 2010-09-08
Court District Court, M.D. North Carolina Date Terminated 2013-01-25
Cause 15:1126 Patent Infringement Assigned To Catherine Caldwell Eagles
Jury Demand Both Referred To L. Patrick Auld
Parties ALLERGAN, INC.; APOTEX CORP.; APOTEX INC.; APOTEX, INC.; DUKE UNIVERSITY; SANDOZ, INC.
Patents 6,403,649; 7,351,404; 7,388,029
Attorneys A. MARTINA HUFNAL; ANDREW M. ALUL; BRANDON C. HELMS; BRYAN G. SCOTT; CRAIG E. COUNTRYMAN; DARRELL A. FRUTH; DAVID MATTHEW WILKERSON; DEANNA J. REICHEL; DEANNE M. MAZZOCHI; DOUGLAS E. MCCANN; ERIC M. DAVID; F. HILL ALLEN , IV; HARVEN V. DESHIELD; HEINZ J. SALMEN; JEFFREY DEAN PATTON; JEFFREY T. THOMAS; JENNIFER HALL; JIM W. PHILLIPS , JR.; JONATHAN E. SINGER; JUANITA R. BROOKS; LIMIN ZHENG; LUKE T. SHANNON; MEREDITH MARTIN ADDY; NEIL A. BENCHELL; PAUL J. MOLINO; RANDAL S. ALEXANDER; TARA M. RAGHAVAN; THOMAS A. RAMMER; THOMAS J. FILARSKI; TIMOTHY F. PETERSON; WILLIAM A. RAKOCZY
Firms Brooks Pierce McLendon Humphrey & Leonard; Brooks Pierce McLendon Humphrey & Leonard, L.L.P.; Rakoczy Molino Mazzochi Siwik, LLP; Steptoe & Johnson LLP; Steptoe and Johnson LLP; Tharrington Smith, LLP
Link to Docket External link to docket
Small Molecule Drugs cited in ALLERGAN, INC. v. APOTEX INC.
The small molecule drugs covered by the patents cited in this case are   Start Trial and   Start Trial .

Details for ALLERGAN, INC. v. APOTEX INC. (M.D.N.C. 2010)

Date Filed Document No. Description Snippet Link To Document
2013-01-24 208 Memorandum and Opinion collectively “Plaintiffs”), and U.S. Patent No. 7,351,404 (“the ‘404 Patent”), which is owned by Allergan. …the ‘029 Patent, (PTX 2); and the ‘819 Patent, (DTX 717). The ‘819 Patent and the ‘029 Patent application…‘029 Patent is not a genus so small that it discloses the ‘404 Patent’s claims. The ‘029 Patent expressly… not infringe on Plaintiffs’ patents, and that if they do, the patents are invalid due to anticipation…scientists applied for the ‘029 Patent on March 31, 2000, and the patent issued on June 17, 2008. (PTX External link to document
2013-01-25 209 Judgment of 2 U.S. Patent No. 7,388,029 (“the ‘029 Patent”) and claim 14 of U.S. Patent No. 7,351,404 (“the ‘404…‘404 Patent”). It is further ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that Judgment is entered in favor of Plaintiffs…noninfringement or invalidity of the ‘029 and ‘404 Patents. It is further ORDERED that, pursuant to…dates of the ‘029 and ‘404 Patents; 2. the effective date of approval…later of the expiration dates of the ‘029 and ‘404 Patents; and 3. the effective date of External link to document
2013-04-23 231 Permanent Injunction expiration dates of U.S. Patent No. 7,351,404 and U.S. Patent No. 7,388,029. 2. Sandoz…the expiration dates of U.S. Patent No. 7,351,404 and U.S. Patent No. 7,388,029. 3. Hi-Tech…expiration dates of U.S. Patent No. 7,351,404 and U.S. Patent No. 7,388,029. This the 23rd day…2010 25 January 2013 1:10-cv-00681 830 Patent Both District Court, M.D. North External link to document
2011-08-02 39 Motion to Consolidate Cases of U.S. Patent Nos. 7,351,404 (“the ‘404 patent”), 7,388,029 (“the ‘029 patent”), and 6,403,649 (“the …of U.S. Patent Nos. 7,351,404 (“the ‘404 patent”), 7,388,029 (“the ‘029 patent”), and 6,403,649 (“the …infringement and validity of the ‘404 patent, the ‘029 patent, and the ‘649 patent. 5. The parties…the ‘649 patent”) under U.S.C. § 271(e)(2) arising from Apotex’s Abbreviated New Drug Application (“ANDA…Latisse®, prior to expiration of the ‘404 and ‘029 patents based on claims of invalidity and noninfringement External link to document
2011-08-02 40 Memorandum of U.S. Patent Nos. 7,351,404 (“the ‘404 patent”), 7,388,029 (“the ‘029 patent”), and 6,403,649 (“the …common questions of claim construction, patent validity, and patent infringement. The two cases are already…consolidation appropriate in patent infringement cases involving the same patents, but multiple defendants…consolidating two patent cases over plaintiff’s objection where plaintiff and patents involved were identical…the ‘649 patent”). Both cases involve similar claims and counterclaims arising from the defendants’ alleged External link to document
2011-10-21 43 Stipulation Plaintiffs' Count III with Respect to U.S. Patent No. 6,403,649 by ALLERGAN, INC., DUKE UNIVERSITY. Associated…2010 25 January 2013 1:10-cv-00681 830 Patent Both District Court, M.D. North External link to document
>Date Filed >Document No. >Description >Snippet >Link To Document

Make Better Decisions: Try a trial or see plans & pricing

Serving leading biopharmaceutical companies globally:

Boehringer Ingelheim
AstraZeneca
Johnson and Johnson
McKinsey
Colorcon
Merck

Drugs may be covered by multiple patents or regulatory protections. All trademarks and applicant names are the property of their respective owners or licensors. Although great care is taken in the proper and correct provision of this service, thinkBiotech LLC does not accept any responsibility for possible consequences of errors or omissions in the provided data. The data presented herein is for information purposes only. There is no warranty that the data contained herein is error free. thinkBiotech performs no independent verification of facts as provided by public sources nor are attempts made to provide legal or investing advice. Any reliance on data provided herein is done solely at the discretion of the user. Users of this service are advised to seek professional advice and independent confirmation before considering acting on any of the provided information. thinkBiotech LLC reserves the right to amend, extend or withdraw any part or all of the offered service without notice.