DrugPatentWatch Database Preview
Litigation Details for Pfizer Inc. v. Apotex Inc. (N.D. Ill. 2008)
Join the DrugPatentWatch Referral Program Get access to a free drug patent landscape report or a free one-month subscription
Pfizer Inc. v. Apotex Inc. (N.D. Ill. 2008)
| Docket | Start Trial | Date Filed | 2008-12-17 |
| Court | District Court, N.D. Illinois | Date Terminated | 2012-03-01 |
| Cause | 35:145 Patent Infringement | Assigned To | Edmond E-Min Chang |
| Jury Demand | Defendant | Referred To | Honorable Martin C. Ashman |
| Parties | APOTEX CORP.; APOTEX INC.; PFIZER INC.; PRIZER IRELAND PHARMACEUTICALS; SERVICE LIST; WARNER-LAMBERT COMPANY; WARNER-LAMBERT COMPANY LLC | ||
| Patents | 4,681,893; 4,895,841; 5,273,995; 5,686,104; 6,126,971 | ||
| Attorneys | Andrew M Alul; Dean A. Monco; Deanne M. Mazzochi; Jeffrey B. Bove; Paul J. Molino; William Andrew Rakoczy | ||
| Link to Docket | External link to docket | ||
Small Molecule Drugs cited in Pfizer Inc. v. Apotex Inc.
The small molecule drugs covered by the patents cited in this case are Start Trial , Start Trial , Start Trial , Start Trial , and Start Trial .
Details for Pfizer Inc. v. Apotex Inc. (N.D. Ill. 2008)
| Date Filed | Document No. | Description | Snippet | Link To Document |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2009-11-12 | 114 | III certification against U.S. Patent No. 4,895,841 (“the ‘841 patent”), which meant that Ranbaxy could…during the patent term of the ‘841 patent. Here, Apotex has agreed to wait out the full patent term of …the ‘995 patent and its reissue (RE667) on which Pfizer originally sued, but also three patents (the ‘104…‘104, ‘156, and ‘971 patents or “non-asserted patents”) which Pfizer has never asserted against Apotex…Mylan for infringement of the ‘156 patent as well as on two other patents not at issue here. Pfizer Inc. | External link to document | |
| 2009-11-12 | 116 | (“‘667 patent”).2 And Apotex Inc.’s paragraph III certification to U.S. Patent No. 4,681,893 is not …position that U.S. Patent No. 5,273,995 (“‘995 patent”), which, together with the ‘667 patent, make up the …collectively, “Pfizer”) have asserted U.S. Patent No. 5,969,156 (“‘156 patent”) against subsequent ANDA-filers…sued on that patent (and others), precisely because Pfizer has never asserted those patents against any…‘156, And ‘971 Patents Against Generic Competitors By Asserting The ‘156 Patent Against Mylan | External link to document | |
| 2010-06-30 | 142 | the ‘ United States Patent No. 5,273,995 (“ 995 patent” …issued U.S. Patent No. RE40,667 (“ 667 ). The ‘ patent” 667 patent is a reissue patent, which… of such patent * * *, reissue the patent for the invention disclosed in the original patent” …on Double Patenting Courts have interpreted the Patent Act to forbid a second patent from covering…well as the Patent Office Rules require surrender of the original patent before a reissue patent may be granted | External link to document | |
| 2010-06-30 | 144 | 156 patent, the ‘ and U.S. Patent No. 4,681,893 (“ … the ‘ 995 patent was reissued in part as U.S. Patent No. 40,667 (“ 667 patent” …well as three other Pfizer patents: U.S. Patent Nos. 5,686,104 (“ 104 patent” … 893 patent and the ‘ 995 patent. The district court found both patents to be valid and… the ‘ United States Patent No. 5,273,995 (“ 995 patent” | External link to document | |
| 2010-07-09 | 148 | March 24, 2010, the expiration date of U.S. Patent No. 4,681,893 plus pediatric exclusivity). (See D.I. 68…March 24, 2010, the expiration date of U.S. Patent No. 4,681,893 plus pediatric exclusivity), is relevant…defeating U.S. Patent No. 5,273,995 (“the ‘995 patent;” the patent from which the ‘667 patent reissued). …Pfizer on U.S. Patent Nos. 5,686,104 (“the ‘104 patent”), 5,969,156 (“the ‘156 patent”), and/or 6,126,971… constitutes patent misuse). Patent misuse is an equitable defense that renders a patent unenforceable | External link to document | |
| >Date Filed | >Document No. | >Description | >Snippet | >Link To Document |
