[author: Sherri Oslick]
About Court Report: Each week we will report briefly on recently filed biotech and pharma cases.
Alcon Pharmaceuticals Ltd. et al. v. Lupin Ltd. et al.
1:12-cv-00973; filed July 24, 2012 in the District Court of Delaware
• Plaintiffs: Alcon Pharmaceuticals Ltd.; Alcon Research Ltd.
• Defendants: Lupin Ltd.; Lupin Pharmaceuticals Inc.
Infringement of U.S. Patent Nos. 6,716,830 ("Ophthalmic Antibiotic Compositions Containing Moxifloxacin," issued April 6, 2004) and 7,671,070 ("Method of Treating Ophthalmic Infections with Moxifloxacin Compositions," issued March 2, 2010) following a Paragraph IV certification as part of Apotex's filing of an ANDA to manufacture a generic version of Alcon's Moxeza® (moxifloxacin hydrochloride, used to treat bacterial conjunctivitis). View the complaint here.
Alcon Pharmaceuticals Ltd. et al. v. Apotex Inc. et al.
1:12-cv-00960; filed July 20, 2012 in the District Court of Delaware
• Plaintiffs: Alcon Pharmaceuticals Ltd.; Alcon Research Ltd.
• Defendants: Apotex Inc.; Apotex Corp.
Infringement of U.S. Patent Nos. 6,716,830 ("Ophthalmic Antibiotic Compositions Containing Moxifloxacin," issued April 6, 2004) and 7,671,070 ("Method of Treating Ophthalmic Infections with Moxifloxacin Compositions," issued March 2, 2010) following a Paragraph IV certification as part of Apotex's filing of an ANDA to manufacture a generic version of Alcon's Vigamox® (moxifloxacin hydrochloride, used to treat bacterial conjunctivitis). View the complaint here.
Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corp. v. Lupin Ltd. et al.
2:12-cv-04552; filed July 20, 2012 in the District Court of New Jersey
• Plaintiff: Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corp.
• Defendants: Lupin Ltd.; Lupin Pharmaceuticals, Inc.
Infringement of U.S. Patent No. 6,294,197 ("Solid Oral Dosage Forms of Valsartan," issued September 25, 2001) following a paragraph IV certification as part of Lupin's filing of an ANDA to manufacture a generic version of Novartis' Diovan HCT® (valsartan and hydrochlorothiazide, used to treat hypertension). View the complaint here.
Celgene Corp. v. Natco Pharma Ltd. et al.
2:12-cv-04571; filed July 20, 2012 in the District Court of New Jersey
• Plaintiff: Celgene Corp.
• Defendants: Natco Pharma Ltd.; Arrow International Ltd.; Watson Pharmaceuticals, Inc.; Watson Laboratories, Inc.
Infringement of U.S. Patent Nos. 5,635,517 ("Method of Reducing TNFα Levels with Amino Substituted 2-(2,6-dioxopiperidin-3-yl)-1-oxo-and 1,3-dioxoisoindolines," issued June 3, 1997), 6,281,230 ("Isoindolines, Method of Use, and Pharmaceutical Compositions," issued August 28, 2001), 7,189,740 ("Methods of Using 3-(4-amino-1-oxo-1,3 dihydro-isoindol-2-yl)-piperidine-2,6-dione for the Treatment and Management of Myelodysplastic Syndromes," issued March 13, 2007), 7,968,569 ("Methods for Treatment of Multiple Myeloma Using 3-(4-amino-1-oxo-1,3 dihydro-isoindol-2-yl)-piperidine-2,6-dione," issued June 28, 2011), 7,977,357 ("Polymorphic Forms of 3-(4-amino-1-oxo-1,3 dihydro-isoindol-2-yl)-piperidine-2,6-dione," issued July 12, 2011), and 8,193,219 (same title, issued June 5, 2012) following a Paragraph IV certification as part of Natco's filing of an ANDA to manufacture a generic version of Celgene's Revlimid® (lenalidomide, used in the treatment of multiple myeloma patients who have received at least one prior therapy, and in the treatment of patients with transfusion-dependent anemia due to Low- or Intermediate-1–risk myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS) associated with a deletion 5q cytogenetic abnormality). View the complaint here.
