Litigation Details for TAKEDA PHARMACEUTICAL COMPANY LTD. v. INDOCO REMEDIES LTD. (D.N.J. 2017)
✉ Email this page to a colleague
TAKEDA PHARMACEUTICAL COMPANY LTD. v. INDOCO REMEDIES LTD. (D.N.J. 2017)
| Docket | ⤷ Try a Trial | Date Filed | 2017-09-20 |
| Court | District Court, D. New Jersey | Date Terminated | 2019-11-04 |
| Cause | 15:1126 Patent Infringement | Assigned To | Stanley R. Chesler |
| Jury Demand | None | Referred To | Cathy L. Waldor |
| Patents | 7,807,689; 8,173,663; 8,288,539; 8,900,638 | ||
| Link to Docket | External link to docket | ||
Small Molecule Drugs cited in TAKEDA PHARMACEUTICAL COMPANY LTD. v. INDOCO REMEDIES LTD.
The small molecule drugs covered by the patents cited in this case are ⤷ Try a Trial , ⤷ Try a Trial , and ⤷ Try a Trial .
Details for TAKEDA PHARMACEUTICAL COMPANY LTD. v. INDOCO REMEDIES LTD. (D.N.J. 2017)
| Date Filed | Document No. | Description | Snippet | Link To Document |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2019-05-08 | 57 | CLAIMS AND COUNTERCLAIMS PERTAINING TO U.S. PATENT NO. 8,900,638; Pursuant to Rule 41 (a)(l)(A)(ii) of the… 2017 5 November 2019 2:17-cv-07301 Patent - Abbreviated New Drug Application(ANDA) None | External link to document | |
| 2019-10-02 | 74 | of record and assignee of U.S. Patent No. 7,807,689 (‘the °689 patent’) and has been at all times relevant…establish the invalidity of U.S. Patent No. 7,807,689 (the “689 patent”) at trial and/or in rebuttal to…determining the patentability of the 689 patent. 13. The Patent Office found the °689 patent claims patentable…obviousness-type double patenting over claim 162 of U.S. Patent No. 7,723,444 (the “Feng patent”) in view of Kim…is not patentably distinct from asserted claims 4 and 12 of the °689 patent. 21. The Feng patent issued | External link to document | |
| 2020-02-03 | 82 | Opinion | double patenting. 17. Claims 4 and 12 of U.S. Patent No. 7,807,689 are valid patent claims.…Torrent.”) Plaintiffs own U.S. Patent No. 7,807,689 (“the ’689 patent”), which is listed in the Orange…second patent for claims that are not patentably distinct from the claims of the first patent. It …claims in a second patent not patentably distinct from the claims of the first patent. The obviousness-type… claims 4 and 12 of the ’689 patent. A bench trial on Defendants’ patent invalidity defenses to infringement | External link to document |
| >Date Filed | >Document No. | >Description | >Snippet | >Link To Document |
