Litigation Details for MITSUBISHI TANABE PHARMA CORPORATION v. SANDOZ INC. (D.N.J. 2017)
✉ Email this page to a colleague
MITSUBISHI TANABE PHARMA CORPORATION v. SANDOZ INC. (D.N.J. 2017)
| Docket | ⤷ Try a Trial | Date Filed | 2017-07-20 |
| Court | District Court, D. New Jersey | Date Terminated | 2021-04-05 |
| Cause | 15:1126 Patent Infringement | Assigned To | Freda L. Wolfson |
| Jury Demand | None | Referred To | Douglas Arpert |
| Parties | ZYDUS PHARMACEUTICALS (USA) INC. | ||
| Patents | 6,414,126; 6,515,117; 6,765,001; 7,943,788; 8,222,219; 8,785,403 | ||
| Attorneys | SARAH ANN SULLIVAN | ||
| Firms | Saul Ewing Arnstein & Lehr LLP | ||
| Link to Docket | External link to docket | ||
Small Molecule Drugs cited in MITSUBISHI TANABE PHARMA CORPORATION v. SANDOZ INC.
The small molecule drugs covered by the patents cited in this case are ⤷ Try a Trial , ⤷ Try a Trial , ⤷ Try a Trial , ⤷ Try a Trial , ⤷ Try a Trial , ⤷ Try a Trial , ⤷ Try a Trial , ⤷ Try a Trial , ⤷ Try a Trial , and ⤷ Try a Trial .
Details for MITSUBISHI TANABE PHARMA CORPORATION v. SANDOZ INC. (D.N.J. 2017)
| Date Filed | Document No. | Description | Snippet | Link To Document |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2017-07-20 | 1 | Complaint | infringement of United States Patent No. 7,943,788 (“the ’788 patent”), United States Patent No. 8,222,219 (“the…the ’219 patent”), and United States Patent No. 8,785,403 (“the ’403 patent”) (collectively, “the patents-in-suit….S.C. § 355(b)(l), the ’788 patent, the ’219 patent, and the ’403 patent are listed in the United States… THE PATENTS-IN-SUIT 19. On May 17, 2011, the ’788 patent, titled “Glucopyranoside…the ’788 patent. 21. JNV is an exclusive sublicensee of the ’788 patent. | External link to document |
| 2020-02-10 | 128 | Stipulation and Order | it is the owner of United States Patent No. 7,943,788 (“the ’788 patent”). WHEREAS, Sandoz has filed Abbreviated…District Court for the District of New Jersey for patent infringement based on Sandoz’s filing of ANDA …2017 5 April 2021 3:17-cv-05319 835 Patent - Abbreviated New Drug Application(ANDA) None | External link to document |
| 2020-05-28 | 166 | Trial Brief | disclosed in the ’117 patent ’126 patent U.S. Patent No. 6,414,126 …Example 10 Example 10 of U.S. Patent No. 6,414,126 FDA United States …788 patent, claim 22 of the ’219 patent, and claim 26 of the ’403 patent BMS…Seiyaku Co., Ltd. patents-in-suit U.S. Patent No. 7,943,788 (“the ’788 patent”), … U.S. Patent No. 8,222,219 (“the ’219 patent”), and U.S. Patent No. 8,785,403 | External link to document |
| 2020-06-15 | 173 | Opinion | infringement of U.S. Patent Nos. 7,943,788 (“the ’788 patent), 8,222,219 (“the ’219 patent), and 8,785,403… (“the ’403 patent”) (collectively, “the patents-in-suit”). Compl. at ¶ 10. The patents-in-suit are… B. Local Patent Rules Pursuant to the Local Patent Rules for the District of…Local Patent Rules. Zydus contends that the “priority date” disclosure required by Local Patent Rule….D. Cal. July 17, 2015) (“Patent L.R. 3-1(f) particularly requires a patent holder to assert a specific | External link to document |
| 2020-07-27 | 185 | Redacted Document | the ’126 patent (U.S. Patent No. 6,414,126) was issued and assigned to BMS. The ’126 patent disclosed…......................28 U.S. Patents U.S. Patent No. 6,414,126.................................…Patents-in-Suit are the ’788 patent (U.S. Patent No. 7,943,788), the ’219 patent (U.S. Patent No. 8,222,219), and… on the ’126 patent, the ’117 patent, and U.S. Patent No. 7,129,220 [“the ’220 patent”]) that 4-ethoxy…of the two patents—the ’788 Patent or the ’219 Patent— is invalid. Here, the ’788 Patent was issued | External link to document |
| 2020-11-24 | 224 | Redacted Document | U.S. Patent No. 6,414,126 (PTX-36) ’117 patent U.S. Patent No. 6,515,117 (DTX-87) US…20 of the ’788 patent, claim 22 of the ’219 patent, and claim 26 of the ’403 patent. (COL ¶ 236.) … as the ’788 patent, the ’219 patent also had the same expiration as the ’788 patent before the latter…original ’788 patent. In fact, this is simply an instance where a subsequent patent in a patent family… ’219 patent over the issued claims of the ’788 patent for obviousness-type double patenting consistent | External link to document |
| 2021-03-22 | 244 | Order | States Patents held by Plaintiffs: (1) claims 12 and 20 of United States Patent Number 7,943,788 (“the…and 20 of the '788 Patent, claim 22 of the '219 Patent, and claim 26 of the '403 Patent, and Judgment on…the ’788 patent”); (2) claim 22 of United States Patent Number 8,222,219 (“the ’219 patent”); and (… United States Patent Number 8,785,403 (“the ’403 patent”) (collectively, “the patents-in-suit”); it …20 of the ’788 Patent, claim 22 of the ’219 Patent, and claim 26 of the ’403 Patent based on obviousness | External link to document |
| >Date Filed | >Document No. | >Description | >Snippet | >Link To Document |
