Litigation Details for Pernix Ireland Pain DAC v. Alvogen Malta Operations Ltd. (D. Del. 2016)
✉ Email this page to a colleague
Pernix Ireland Pain DAC v. Alvogen Malta Operations Ltd. (D. Del. 2016)
| Docket | ⤷ Try a Trial | Date Filed | 2016-03-04 |
| Court | District Court, D. Delaware | Date Terminated | |
| Cause | 35:0145 | Assigned To | Gregory Moneta Sleet |
| Jury Demand | None | Referred To | |
| Patents | 8,808,740; 9,265,760; 9,339,499 | ||
| Link to Docket | External link to docket | ||
Small Molecule Drugs cited in Pernix Ireland Pain DAC v. Alvogen Malta Operations Ltd.
The small molecule drug covered by the patents cited in this case is ⤷ Try a Trial .
Details for Pernix Ireland Pain DAC v. Alvogen Malta Operations Ltd. (D. Del. 2016)
| Date Filed | Document No. | Description | Snippet | Link To Document |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2018-05-15 | 216 | Opinion - Memorandum Opinion | references, U.S. Patent Appl. No. 2006/0240105 (“Devane”) and U.S. Patent No. 8,808,740 (“Huang”). …Pernix’s U.S. Patent No. 9,265,760 (“the ’760 patent”), and claim 1 of Pernix’s U.S. Patent No. 9,339,499…,499 (“the ’499 patent”). Pernix’s patents are directed to methods of treating pain in patients with …patients’ systems. See ’760 patent, col. 2, ll. 41–66. The patented invention encompasses formulations…claims 12, 17, and 19 of the ’760 patent, and claim 1 of the ’499 patent, are likewise directed to methods | External link to document |
| 2018-06-08 | 236 | Order | reports to challenge Alvogen’s claim that U.S. Patent No. 8,808,740 to Huang is an invalidating prior art reference…party admissions is an issue that is not unique to patent law, Third Circuit law—not Federal Circuit law—…Fed. Cir. 2014) (merits of evidentiary rulings in patent cases reviewed under regional circuit law). As… 4 March 2016 1:16-cv-00139-WCB Patent None District Court, D. Delaware | External link to document |
| 2018-06-08 | 237 | Opinion - Memorandum Opinion | groups. Claims 1–4 and 11 of U.S. Patent No. 9,265,760 (“the ’760 patent”) recite a method of treating pain…and 19 of the ’760 patent and claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. 9,339,499 (“the ’499 patent”) recite a method…Importantly, the patent in Mayo “simply describe[d] that relation,” and was thus patent ineligible. Id.…the Court concludes that the asserted claims are patent eligible. Signed by Judge William C. Bryson on …7.1.5, and may be granted only “if the court has ‘patently misunderstood a party, made a decision outside | External link to document |
| >Date Filed | >Document No. | >Description | >Snippet | >Link To Document |
