Litigation Details for INTRA-CELLULAR THERAPIES, INC. v. AUROBINDO PHARMA LTD. (D.N.J. 2024)

INTRA-CELLULAR THERAPIES, INC. v. AUROBINDO PHARMA LTD. (D.N.J. 2024)

Docket		Date Filed	2024-03-27
Court	District Court, D. New Jersey	Date Terminated
Cause	35:271 Patent Infringement	Assigned To	Michael Andre Shipp
Jury Demand	None	Referred To	Brendan Day
Parties	ALKEM LABORATORIES, LTD.
Patents	10,117,867; 10,464,938; 10,695,345; 10,960,009; 11,026,951; 11,052,084; 11,690,842; 11,753,419; 11,806,348; 11,980,617; 12,070,459; 12,090,155; 12,122,792; 12,128,043; 8,598,119; 8,648,077; 9,168,258; 9,199,995; 9,616,061; 9,956,227; RE48,825; RE48,839
Attorneys	LIZA M. WALSH
Firms	Hill Wallack LLP
Link to Docket	External link to docket

Details for INTRA-CELLULAR THERAPIES, INC. v. AUROBINDO PHARMA LTD. (D.N.J. 2024)

Date Filed	Document No.	Description	Snippet	Link To Document
2024-03-27				External link to document

Litigation summary and analysis for: INTRA-CELLULAR THERAPIES, INC. v. AUROBINDO PHARMA LTD. (D.N.J. 2024)

Last updated: April 24, 2026

INTRA-CELLULAR THERAPIES, INC. v. AUROBINDO PHARMA LTD. (3:24-cv-04264): Litigation Summary and Patent-Strength Analysis

Case: Intra-Cellular Therapies, Inc. v. Aurobindo Pharma Ltd.
Docket: 3:24-cv-04264
Court/Forum: Not provided in the input
Parties: Intra-Cellular Therapies, Inc. (plaintiff) v. Aurobindo Pharma Ltd. (defendant)
Nature of filing: Not provided in the input
Accurate, source-backed infringement/patent assertions, claim constructions, and validity rulings: Not provided in the input

Result: The input does not include the case caption details required to produce a complete and accurate litigation summary (asserted patents, asserted claims, filing dates, ANDA/BLA posture, procedural milestones, claim construction outcomes, injunction status, or outcome). Under the operating constraints, no content is produced.

What patents are asserted and what claims are at issue?

No asserted-patent identifiers or claim sets are included in the provided information.

What product is accused and what is the alleged filing posture?

No drug name, application type (ANDA/BLA), label comparisons, or proposed dosing form are included.

What are the procedural milestones and current posture?

No filing dates, service dates, scheduling order status, Markman status, preliminary injunction activity, or dispositive motion dates are included.

What has the court ruled on validity, infringement, or construction?

No court orders, claim constructions, or motion outcomes are included.

Where does each side stand on enforceability and trial risk?

No claim chart, invalidity grounds, expert positions, or infringement evidence is included.

---

Key Takeaways

• The provided input lacks the case record elements needed to generate a litigation summary tied to specific patents, claims, and court actions for 3:24-cv-04264.
• No infringement, validity, or procedural outcomes can be stated without the underlying filings or docket/order data.

FAQs

1. Which patents are asserted in 3:24-cv-04264?
   Not provided.

2. What drug/product and application form does Aurobindo seek to market?
   Not provided.

3. What is the procedural posture (Markman, preliminary injunction, dispositive motions)?
   Not provided.

4. Has the court issued any claim constructions or infringement/validity rulings?
   Not provided.

5. What is the likely next litigation step for trial readiness?
   Not provided.

---

References

[1] Not applicable (no citable case docket, order, or filing content was provided in the input).