You are 3 steps away
from making better decisions

Serving leading biopharmaceutical companies globally:

AstraZeneca
Moodys
Express Scripts
Boehringer Ingelheim
McKinsey
Baxter

Last Updated: March 28, 2020

DrugPatentWatch Database Preview

Litigation Details for Procter & Gamble Co. v. Teva Pharmaceuticals (D. Del. 2004)


Email this page to a colleague

» See Plans and Pricing

« Back to Dashboard

Procter & Gamble Co. v. Teva Pharmaceuticals (D. Del. 2004)

Docket   Start Trial Date Filed 2004-08-13
Court District Court, D. Delaware Date Terminated 2008-05-23
Cause 35:271 Patent Infringement Assigned To Joseph James Farnan Jr.
Jury Demand None Referred To
Parties TEVA PHARMACEUTICALS U.S.A., INC.; THE PROCTER & GAMBLE COMPANY
Patents 3,591,584; 4,072,746; 4,444,779; 4,572,909; 4,621,077; 4,687,777; 4,822,609; 5,358,941; 5,583,122; 5,616,560; 5,622,721; 5,681,590; 5,804,570; 5,994,329; 6,015,801; 6,090,410; 6,096,342; 6,165,513; 6,194,004; 6,465,443
Attorneys Adam Wyatt Poff; Frederick L. Cottrell , III; Josy W. Ingersoll; Karen Elizabeth Keller; Steven J. Fineman
Firms Richards, Layton & Finger, PA; Shaw Keller LLP; Young, Conaway, Stargatt & Taylor LLP
Link to Docket External link to docket
Small Molecule Drugs cited in Procter & Gamble Co. v. Teva Pharmaceuticals
Biologic Drugs cited in Procter & Gamble Co. v. Teva Pharmaceuticals
The biologic drugs covered by the patents cited in this case are   Start Trial and   Start Trial .

Details for Procter & Gamble Co. v. Teva Pharmaceuticals (D. Del. 2004)

Date Filed Document No. Description Snippet Link To Document
2006-12-20 100 POST Trial Brief ; In particular, the inventors of l.i.S, Patent No. 4,621,077, which Was filed in 1984 and claims alendronate… the ‘406 patent is prior art to the ‘122 patent at allv Moreover, even if the ‘4()6 patent is prior art…The heart of the ‘4()6 patent is a closing regimen The ‘406 patent and ‘122 patent are directed to the …nonstatutory double patenting compares claims in an earlier patent to claims in a later patent or applicationt…he ‘406 patent is not prior art to claims 4, 16, and 23 of the ‘122 patent 12. The ‘l22 patent is presumed External link to document
2007-04-09 105 Exhibit 1 application issued as U.S Patent No. 4,572,909 ("the '909 patent'Q on Febru~ ary 25, 1986…quot;rhe '303 patent'Q to Pfizer, infringed claims l-3 of the '303 patent The ANDA product …#39;303 patent are invalid [*3] for anticipation and obviousness, and that the '303 patent is unenforceable… of claims 1-3 of the '303 patent, and that if the '303 patent were upheld as valid and enforceable…held that the term of the '909 patent as extended under the patent term restora- tion provision of the External link to document
2007-07-06 107 Exhibit t.|iSt F’atent l\lo" 4,444,779 (the “'779 Patent”)r The ’779 patent is of particular relevance…ciaimed in the patent in suit Takeda owns U.S, Patent 4,687,777 (the "’?'77 patent") entitled… ’779 patent That patent covers a subset of compounds originally included in the '200 patent application… is not patentable fm D. “if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the …court Hrst considered Takeda’s U.S. Patent 4,287,200 (the “'200 patent"), which was issued on Septernber External link to document
2008-02-28 117 Opinion infringed on United States Patent Nos. 5,538,122 (“the ‘122 Patent”) and 6,096,342.l (D.I. l.) On August 25…the ‘406 patent, and in particular, claim 15 of the ‘406 patent. (Teva PFF 15.) The ‘406 Patent issued …between the ‘406 Patent and ‘122 Patent, and whether such differences render the ‘122 patent obvious. The …matter claimed by the ‘122 patent and the ‘406 patent. For example, the ‘122 patent discloses the design and…double patenting. Obviousness-type double patenting, also known as non-statutory double patenting, is a External link to document
2008-03-27 122 Exhibit A and B , IG, and 23 O't" U.S. Patent No. 5,583,122 (“the ’122 patent”); AND ll" IS FURTHHR ORDERED…3, 5, 7, 9 and ll of U.S" Patent NO. Re, 34,712 (“th@ ‘712 patent”) is entered in favor Of ?laintiffs…United States any products that infringe the ‘712 patent, including the escitalopram oxalate products referred…Application Noq 76*765 until such time as the ‘712 patent expires, including any extensions and regulatory…previously bifurcated and stayed claims for willful patent infringement and exceptional case under 35 U.S External link to document
2008-05-22 124 Exhibit A-[Proposed] Order of Final Judgment infringed Claims 4, 16 and 23 of U.S. Patent 5,583,122 (“the ’l22 patent”); AND IT IS FURTHER ORDERED AND…expiration of the ’ 122 patent, including any extension of the term of that patent; AND IT IS FURTHER ORDERED…of the ’122 patent (December `l3, 2013), including any extension of the term of that patent. DATED this…ADJUDGED that Claims 4, 16, and 23 of the ’ 122 patent are valid and enforceable; AND IT IS FURTHER ORDERED…United States any products that infringe the ’122 patent, including the 5 mg or 35 mg risedronate sodium External link to document
2008-05-22 125 Letter the validity of plaintiff’s U.S. Patent No. 5,583,122. We write to advise the Court that… 2004 23 May 2008 1:04-cv-00940 830 Patent None District Court, D. Delaware External link to document
>Date Filed >Document No. >Description >Snippet >Link To Document

Make Better Decisions: Try a trial or see plans & pricing

Serving leading biopharmaceutical companies globally:

Baxter
Dow
Boehringer Ingelheim
AstraZeneca
Merck
Mallinckrodt

Drugs may be covered by multiple patents or regulatory protections. All trademarks and applicant names are the property of their respective owners or licensors. Although great care is taken in the proper and correct provision of this service, thinkBiotech LLC does not accept any responsibility for possible consequences of errors or omissions in the provided data. The data presented herein is for information purposes only. There is no warranty that the data contained herein is error free. thinkBiotech performs no independent verification of facts as provided by public sources nor are attempts made to provide legal or investing advice. Any reliance on data provided herein is done solely at the discretion of the user. Users of this service are advised to seek professional advice and independent confirmation before considering acting on any of the provided information. thinkBiotech LLC reserves the right to amend, extend or withdraw any part or all of the offered service without notice.