DrugPatentWatch Database Preview
Litigation Details for Boston Scientific Corporation v. Johnson and Johnson Inc. (D. Del. 2007)
Join the DrugPatentWatch Referral Program Get access to a free drug patent landscape report or a free one-month subscription
Boston Scientific Corporation v. Johnson and Johnson Inc. (D. Del. 2007)
| Docket | Start Trial | Date Filed | 2007-06-01 |
| Court | District Court, D. Delaware | Date Terminated | 2010-01-20 |
| Cause | 35:145 Patent Infringement | Assigned To | Sue Lewis Robinson |
| Jury Demand | Both | Referred To | |
| Parties | BOSTON SCIENTIFIC CORPORATION; BOSTON SCIENTIFIC SCIMED INC.; CORDIS CORPORATION; JOHNSON & JOHNSON; WYETH | ||
| Patents | 5,362,718; 5,378,475 | ||
| Attorneys | Andrew Auchincloss Lundgren; David T. Pritikin; John G. Day; Jon M. Spanbauer; Josy W. Ingersoll; Karen Elizabeth Keller; Karen L. Pascale; Lauren E. Maguire; Russell E. Cass; Steven J. Balick; Tiffany Geyer Lydon; William H. Baumgartner | ||
| Link to Docket | External link to docket | ||
Small Molecule Drugs cited in Boston Scientific Corporation v. Johnson and Johnson Inc.
The small molecule drugs covered by the patents cited in this case are Start Trial and Start Trial .
Details for Boston Scientific Corporation v. Johnson and Johnson Inc. (D. Del. 2007)
| Date Filed | Document No. | Description | Snippet | Link To Document |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2007-06-01 | 1 | Complaint | /1991 Hsn ........................... 604/266 5,378,475 A 1/1995 smith er s1. ................ 424/473…States Patent No. 7,223,286 (“the Wright 3286 patent”). The Wright 3286 patent issued from the Patent Off…the ’764 and ’536 patents are part of the same patent family as the Wright ’286 patent and the Falotico… of the ‘286 patent, and is infringing the ‘286 patent with knowledge of Cordis’s patent rights. Abbott…least the Wright ’764 patent, the Wright ’536 patent, and United States Patent No. 6,776,796 (“the Falotico | External link to document |
| 2009-06-25 | 221 | 5,362,718 (“the ”?l 8 patent”) to the PTO. Upon information and belief, one or more of the Applicants…reasonable Patent Examiner would have considered the ’579 patent important to the patentability of the claims…reasonable Patent Examiner would have considered the ")'90 patent important to the patentability of …reasonable Patent Examiner would have considered the ’71 8 patent important to the patentability of the claims…reasonable Patent Examiner would have considered the ’ l 730 patent important to the patentability 0ftl' | External link to document | |
| >Date Filed | >Document No. | >Description | >Snippet | >Link To Document |
