HOGAN & HARTSON APR -9 P4 :18 BY HAND DELIVERY
|
|
- Thomas Gray
- 5 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 HOGAN & HARTSON APR -9 P4 :18 Hogan & Hartson up Columbia Square 555 Thirteenth Street, NW Washington, DC Tel Fax Philip Katz Partner BY HAND DELIVERY Division of Dockets Management Food and Drug Administration 5630 Fishers Lane, Room 1061 Rockville, Maryland CITIZEN PETITION On behalf of Abbott Laboratories ("Abbott"), Hogan & Hartson submits this citizen petition under 21 U.S.C. 355(b) and 355(q), as well as 21 C.F.R , to request that the Commissioner of Food and Drugs take the actions described below with respect to any new drug application ("NDA") submitted in accordance with section 505(b)(2) of the Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act ("FDCA") that references Abbott's product, AndroGel (testosterone gel). Abbott recently acquired Solvay Pharmaceuticals ("Solvay") and through that transaction obtained AndroGel. The basis for Abbott's request is FDA's August 2009 response to a citizen petition submitted by Auxilium Pharmaceuticals ("Auxilium") regarding Testim (testosterone gel). In that response, FDA stated that certain differences in inactive ingredients between an approved testosterone gel and a proposed generic - including, but not limited to, different penetration enhancers - would trigger the need for skin transfer and hand washing studies. The Agency addressed the implications of that policy for any application for what might be considered a generic testosterone gel product : In short, we have determined that any application for a testosterone transdermal gel product that has different penetration enhancers than the reference listed drug will require transfer and hand-washing studies. The practical effect of this determination is that any application for a testosterone gel product that has different penetration enhancers than the reference listed drug cannot be submitted as an ANDA and, instead, will have to be submitted as an NDA under section 505(b) of the [FDCA]. Citizen Petition Response, Docket No. FDA-2009-P-0123 at 5 (Aug. 26, 2009) (emphasis added) ("Auxilium Response"). The Agency was clear in its response that the requirement of skin transfer and hand washing studies for a product with different penetration enhancers than the reference listed drug applies to all proposed testosterone gel products, not just those referencing Auxilium's Testim. Accordingly, Abbott understands the Agency's policy to apply to any proposed generic version of AndroGel that contains a different penetration enhancer than Abbott's product.
2 Page 2 In June 2009, Solvay received notice from Perrigo Israel Pharmaceuticals ("Perrigo") that the company had submitted two abbreviated new drug applications ("ANDAs") for generic versions of AndroGel.' Under FDA's enunciated policy, therefore, unless the Perrigo products contain the identical penetration enhancers found in the referenced AndroGel products, the applications for those products must contain data from skin transfer and hand washing studies, and cannot be submitted as ANDAs. Moreover, the law requires (a) FDA to refuse to approve any pending ANDA for a product containing a different penetration enhancer than AndroGel, and (b) the applicant to submit to the Office of New Drugs an application containing the required clinical data as an NDA in accordance with FDCA 505(b)(2). The law also would require FDA and the applicant to comply with all applicable procedures and regulatory requirements associated with submission of an NDA, including the assignment of a goal date under the Prescription Drug User Fee Act, and the submission of new certifications to all patents listed with AndroGel in the Orange Book. Although Abbott believes the Auxilium Response, statutory and regulatory imperatives, and past Agency practices are clear and consistent on these points, because of the importance of these issues, we are submitting this citizen petition to ask FDA to take the actions described below. I. ACTIONS REQUESTED Abbott respectfully requests that FDA take the following actions : " Require any applicant seeking to rely on AndroGel as the reference listed drug for a proposed product that does not contain the same penetration enhancers as AndroGel to conduct transfer and hand-washing studies (and the other required studies as set forth in the Auxilium Citizen Petition Response), and to seek approval by means of an NDA submitted in accordance with FDCA 505(b)(2), not an ANDA submitted under FDCA 505(j), unless the applicant has obtained a right of reference from Abbott. Require any NDA referencing AndroGel, including a 505(b)(2) NDA for a product that previously had been the subject of an ANDA referencing AndroGel, to contain new certifications to all patents listed with AndroGel in the Orange Book, and if any of those certifications assert that the patent is invalid, unenforceable, or will not be infringed, require the applicant to provide timely notification to Solvay, as provided for in FDCA 505(b)(3). II. STATEMENT OF GROUNDS A. Statutory and Regulatory Requirements The FDCA contains two provisions that allow an applicant to gain approval of a product by relying to some degree on FDA's previous determination that another drug product is safe and effective. FDCA 505(j) permits the approval of an ANDA based on FDA's prior approval of another product (the reference listed drug), so long as the proposed product has the same active ingredient, dosage form, route of administration, strength, and labeling (with important exceptions not relevant here) as the approved ' Perrigo was required to notify Solvay of the existence of the ANDAs, Nos and , because the applications contained Paragraph N certifications to a patent listed with AndroGel in the FDA publication, Approved Drug Products with Therapeutic Equivalence Evaluations (the "Orange Book"). See 21 U.S.C. 355(j)(2)(B) ; 21 C.F.R
3 Page 3 drug. The proposed and approved products must also have the same bioavailability (i.e., they must be bioequivalent to one another). See 21 U.S.C. 355(j)(2)(A). With regard to inactive ingredients, FDCA 505(j) provides that FDA must not approve an ANDA unless information shows that the inactive ingredients in the proposed product are safe for use under the conditions described in the labeling. See 21 U.S.C. 355(j)(4)(H). The Agency has implemented this relatively simple statutory standard through detailed regulations that specify what types of changes to an approved product's formulation may raise questions about a generic's safety. See 21 C.F.R (a)(9) and (a)(8). With regard to topical drugs, FDA's regulations reflect the unique scientific challenges raised by such drugs, and generally require that generic versions of topical products contain the same inactive ingredients as their reference listed drugs. See 21 C.F.R (a)(9)(v). An ANDA applicant may seek approval of a topical product that contains different inactive ingredients than the listed drug, but must characterize those differences and demonstrate that they do not affect the safety of the proposed product. Importantly, however, FDCA 505(j) also includes a provision that prohibits FDA from reviewing clinical or other additional data in the context of an ANDA. See 21 U.S.C. 355(j)(2)(A). For this reason, if a demonstration of the safety of a generic product requires data - particularly clinical data - beyond what may be submitted in an ANDA, FDA must refuse to approve the application under FDCA 505(j). This prohibition on the review of clinical data under an ANDA was the basis for FDA's decision in the Auxilium Response that applications containing data from transfer and hand-washing studies cannot be submitted as ANDAs. When an applicant files an NDA under 505(b)(2) of the FDCA, the same limitations that apply to ANDAs under FDCA 505(j) do not apply. First, the two products do not have to be "the same," i.e., bioequivalent and with the same active ingredient, dosage form, route of administration, strength, and labeling. Second, a 505(b)(2) NDA may contain clinical and whatever other data as necessary to demonstrate the safety and effectiveness of the proposed product. See 21 U.S.C. 355(b)(2) ; 21 C.F.R Precisely what data are necessary to support the approval of a product under FDCA 505(b)(2) will depend on the extent and nature of any differences between that product and the reference listed drug. Although there are important differences between 505(b)(2) NDAs and ANDAs,2 the two applications are similar in some respects. For example, the Agency's 505(b)(2) NDA regulations contain provisions - not identical but parallel to those for ANDAs - regarding patent certifications, and 505(b)(2) applicants may be made subject to 30-month stays of approval if they submit Paragraph IV certifications. Compare 21 C.F.R (i)(1)(i), , and (a)(1)(vi) with 21 C.F.R (a)(12)(i) and ; see 21 C.F.R Similarly, both 505(b)(2) NDAs and ANDAs may be blocked by three- and fiveyear marketing exclusivities. Compare 21 U.S.C. 355(c)(3)(E) with 21 U.S.C. 3550)(5)(F) ; see 21 C.F.R As the above discussion demonstrates, although the patent certification, exclusivity, and other provisions for 505(b)(2) NDAs and ANDAs are similar, they are distinct, and each application carries with it independent obligations regarding, for instance, the patents listed in the Orange Book with the reference listed drug. Further, there is no statutory or regulatory authority permitting the Agency to allow an applicant to simply "convert" or "switch" an ANDA to a 505(b)(2) NDA and avoid the various 2 In addition to the fact that a 505(b)(2) NDA may contain clinical data, for example, a 505(b)(2) NDA must demonstrate the subject product's safety and effectiveness, not just its sameness and bioequivalence to the reference listed drug.
4 Page 4 obligations attendant to a new submission.3 This makes sense, in part because NDAs and ANDAs are reviewed by different agency components and under different standards. NDAs are reviewed by personnel within the relevant division within the Office of New Drugs, and must demonstrate, inter alia, a product's safety and effectiveness. See 21 U.S.C. 355(c) and 355(d). ANDAs are reviewed by the Office of Generic Drugs, and must generally demonstrate, inter alia, that a proposed product and the reference listed drug have the same active ingredient, route of administration, dosage form, and strength, and bioavailability. See 21 U.S.C. 355(j)(4) 4 B. FDA Precedents The procedural path set forth here for applicants who file a 505(b)(2) NDA after having filed and withdrawn an ANDA referencing AndroGel tracks FDA's actions in similar situations. We are aware of several instances in which a 505(b)(2) NDA submitted after the rejection or withdrawal of an ANDA for the same drug product was treated as a new application, subject to the procedures and requirements of initial NDA submissions, including the submission of new patent certifications under 21 U.S.C. 355(b)(2) and 21 C.F.R (i)(1)(i) and (a)(1)(vi). These detailed requirements were not waived simply because the products had previously been the subject of ANDAs that were rejected or withdrawn prior to approval. In December 1999, for example, Andrx Pharmaceuticals ("Andrx") submitted an ANDA for a proposed generic version of Depakote (divalproex sodium delayed release tablets), including Paragraph N certifications to two patents. See Joint Status Report and Motion to Extend Stay, Abbott Labs. v. Andrx Corp., Case No CN-HIGHSMITH/GARBER at 1 (S.D. Fla. Oct. 8, 2002) (unsealed Dec. 4, 2003) (attached as Exhibit A). In January 2001, and again in July 2002, FDA sent Andrx letters notifying the applicant that the ANDA could not be approved, because the product contained a different active ingredient than the reference listed drug. See id. at 2. In the 2002 letter, FDA suggested that the applicant explore submitting an NDA under section 505(b). See id. at 9 (enclosing a letter from FDA to Andrx). Andrx did so, submitting new Paragraph IV certifications to the same two patents at some point between November 2002 and March 2003, and received tentative approval in May 2004 (i.e., after a standard period of review). See Citizen Petition, Docket No. 2004P-0320 at 4 (July 15, 2004). The applicant also provided new Paragraph IV notifications to Abbott, in March See id. at 4. Similarly, Penederm ("Penederm") submitted an ANDA in May 1991 for a proposed generic version of Retin-A (tretinoin gel). See Letter from Penederm to FDA at 2 (Sept. 24, 1993) (attached as Exhibit B). Although FDA initially received the ANDA for review, the agency informed the applicant in August 1992 that the application was not acceptable as an ANDA because the product contained an excipient not in the reference listed drug and not previously approved. See id. Penederm withdrew the ANDA at FDA's request, and submitted a 505(b)(2) NDA in September 1993, with a new Paragraph IV certification (and new notification to the NDA and patent holders). See id. ; see also Patent Certification submitted with NDA (Sept. 16, 1993) (attached as Exhibit C). After issuing several not approvable letters, FDA 3 Although there are rules permitting applicants to request waivers of various requirements for 505(b)(2) NDAs and ANDAs, see 21 C.F.R and (b), those regulations are not applicable here, because they only apply where compliance with existing requirements is unnecessary, impossible, etc. We are unaware of these waiver provisions ever being used to waive the requirement that applicants submit appropriate patent certifications. Moreover, because any waiver of such a requirement would significantly disadvantage Abbott, as well as other applicants, public notice of FDA consideration of a waiver should be required. 4 For these reasons, moving from an ANDA to a 505(b)(2) NDA is not the same as moving from an NDA submitted under FDCA 505(b)(1) (i.e., a "full" NDA) to a 505(b)(2) NDA, or vice versa.
5 Page 5 approved the NDA in January Exhibit D). See Approval Letter for NDA (Jan. 29, 1998) (attached as Another example is the ANDA for a proposed generic version of 3M Pharmaceuticals' MetroGel Vaginal (metronidazole gel) that Teva Pharmaceuticals ("Teva") submitted in February In April 2002, the Agency refused to receive the ANDA, because the proposed product was not bioequivalent to the reference listed drug ; a second refusal letter was sent in June See Medical Review for NDA at 2 (May 19, 2005) (attached as Exhibit E). In October 2003, FDA sent Teva a letter requesting that the ANDA be withdrawn. See id. Teva withdrew the ANDA in November 2003, and submitted a 505(b)(2) NDA in July See Regulatory Filing Review for NDA at 1 (May 5, 2005) (attached as Exhibit F). That application, which contained new Paragraph III certifications to three listed patents, was accepted for filing as of September 2004, and was assigned a standard, ten-month review clock. See id. at l, 4. These precedents are consistent with applicable law, the animating principles of the Hatch Waxman Act, and the careful compromise between pioneer and generic drug manufacturers that the Act has come to represent. Any 505(b)(2) NDA applicant that does not submit new patent certifications, for example, should not be considered to have met the requirements for filing, let alone approval. See 21 C.F.R (i)(1)(i) and (a)(1)(vi) ; see also Exhibit F at 4-5 (requiring certifications to be made under 21 C.F.R ). In addition to contravening the explicit language of the statute and FDA regulations, not requiring a 505(b)(2) NDA applicant to submit new certifications would unjustly provide that applicant with a significant advantage over other applicants, and could deprive the sponsor of the reference listed drug of important statutory protections, because it could effectively eliminate the sponsor's ability to sue and obtain a 30-month stay of approval. See 21 U.S.C. 355(c)(3)(C) and 355(j)(5)(B)(iii) (providing for 30-month stays only for patents submitted to FDA before the date on which the application was submitted).' C. Conclusion Abbott believes the FDCA, FDA regulations, and previous Agency actions regarding similarly situated entities require any new 505(b)(2) NDA - regardless of the proposed product's history - to satisfy all applicable statutory and regulatory requirements, including the submission of new patent certifications under 21 U.S.C. 355(b)(2)(A). Accordingly, we respectfully submit this citizen petition to confirm FDA's policies in this regard and their application to 505(b)(2) NDAs for products that seek to rely on AndroGel as the reference listed drug. III. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT The actions requested in this petition are subject to categorical exclusions under 21 C.F.R and IV. ECONOMIC IMPACT Information on the economic impact of this petition will be submitted upon request of the Commissioner of Food and Drugs. 5 Requiring new patent certifications is also consistent with the concept that it is the submission of the application itself - an ANDA, a 505(b)(2) NDA, or one after the other - that is the act of patent infringement. See 35 U.S.C. 271(e)(2)(A).
6 Page 6 V. CERTIFICATION I certify that, to my best knowledge and belief: (a) this petition includes all information and views upon which the petition relies ; (b) this petition includes representative data and/or information known to the petitioner that are unfavorable to the petition ; and (c) I have taken reasonable steps to ensure that any representative data and/or information that are unfavorable to the petition were disclosed to me. I further certify that the information upon which I have based the action requested herein first became known to the party on whose behalf this petition is submitted on or about the following date : September 3, 2009, after FDA's August 27, 2009, response to the Auxilium petition was made public. If I received or expect to receive payments, including cash and other forms of consideration, to file this information or its contents, I received or expect to receive those payments from the following persons or organizations : Abbott Laboratories. I verify under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct as of the date of the submission of this petition. Attachments cc : Jane Axelrad, Esq., Office of Regulatory Policy Elizabeth Dickinson, Esq., Office of Chief Counsel John Jenkins, M.D., Office of New Drugs Keith Webber, Ph.D., Office of Generic Drugs Steven N. Gersten, Esq., Abbott Laboratories
7
PHARMACEUTICAL LAW GROUP PC
in L PHARMACEUTICAL LAW GROUP PC AT THE INTERSECTION OF FDA REGULATION AND INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY 900 SEVENTH STREET, NW - SUITE 650 - WASHINGTON, DC 20001-3886 T 202 589 1780 F 202 318 2198 WWW.PHARMALAWGRP.COM
More informationo 1205 Culbreth Dr., Suite 200, Wilmington, NC Phone : Facsimile :
Osmotica Pharmaceutical 1?54,Lt. 27 P2 :05 BY HAND DELIVERY Division of Dockets Management Food and Drug Administration Department of Health and Human Services 563"0 Fishers Lane, Room 1061 Rockville,
More informationGuidance for Industry
Guidance for Industry Citizen Petitions and Petitions for Stay ofaction Subject to Section 505(q) ofthe Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act DRAFT GUIDANCE This guidance document is being distributed for
More informationLitigation Webinar Series. Hatch-Waxman 101. Chad Shear Principal, San Diego
Litigation Webinar Series Hatch-Waxman 101 Chad Shear Principal, San Diego 1 Overview Hatch-Waxman Series Housekeeping CLE Contact: Jane Lundberg lundberg@fr.com Questions January 25, 2018 INSIGHTS Litigation
More information(4- I. Background. Douald O. Beers Arnold & Porter LLP 555 Twelfth Street, N.W. Washington, D.c
(4- DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH &. HUMAN SERVICES Public Health Service Food and Drug Administration Rockville MD 20857 Douald O. Beers Arnold & Porter LLP 555 Twelfth Street, N.W. Washington, D.c. 20004-1206
More informationIff/]) FEB Gregory 1. Glover Pharmaceutical Law Group PC 900 Seventh Street, NW Suite 650 Washington, DC
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH &. HUMAN SERVICES FEB 2 2 2011 Food and Drug Administration Rockville MD 20857 Gregory 1. Glover Pharmaceutical Law Group PC 900 Seventh Street, NW Suite 650 Washington, DC 20001-3886
More informationA. ANDAs and Eligibility for 180-day Exclusivity
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH & HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration Rockville, MD 20857 SENT VIA ELECTRONIC MAIL Dear Celecoxib ANDA Applicant: This letter addresses the legal and regulatory scheme governing
More informationSuitability Petition (SP)
Suitability Petitions Dr. Ken Harshman, Director Division of Generic Animal Drugs Center for Veterinary Medicine AAVPT Workshop Veterinary Drug Regulatory Life Cycle (A to Z) March 2, 2011 Suitability
More informationAttorneys for Defendants Watson Laboratories, Inc. and Watson Pharmaceuticals, Inc.
Case 2:10-cv-00080-FSH -PS Document 15 Filed 03/01/10 Page 1 of 14 HELLRING LINDEMAN GOLDSTEIN & SIEGAL LLP Matthew E. Moloshok, Esq. Robert S. Raymar, Esq. One Gateway Center Newark, New Jersey 07102-5386
More informationWe have carefully considered the Petition.! For the reasons described below, the Petition is granted.
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH &. HUMAN SERVICES... -------------_._- Food and Drug Administration Rockville MD 20857 JUN 17 2010. Pankaj Dave, Ph.D. Vice President, Regulatory Affairs Navinta LLC 1499 Lower Ferry
More informationThis responds to your citizen petition dated July 24, 2009, submitted on behalf of Osmotica
~ 1: 'i;ßrvices. ú" L /t" DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH & HUMAN SERVICES ;i ~ :; E "'1\ ~.lqlf,n:a Food and Drug Administration Rockville MD 20857 Mark S. Aikman, Phar.D. Vice President, Regulatory Affairs and
More informationCase: 1:16-cv Document #: 1 Filed: 03/09/16 Page 1 of 13 PageID #:1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION
Case: 1:16-cv-02988 Document #: 1 Filed: 03/09/16 Page 1 of 13 PageID #:1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION TORRENT PHARMACEUTICALS LIMITED, and TORRENT PHARMA
More informationPharmaceutical Product Improvements and Life Cycle Management Antitrust Pitfalls 1
Pharmaceutical Product Improvements and Life Cycle Management Antitrust Pitfalls 1 The terms product switching, product hopping and line extension are often used to describe the strategy of protecting
More informationCase 3:14-cv MLC-TJB Document Filed 07/24/15 Page 2 of 16 PageID: 1111 TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION... 1 BACKGROUND...
Case 3:14-cv-02550-MLC-TJB Document 100-1 Filed 07/24/15 Page 1 of 16 PageID: 1110 Keith J. Miller Michael J. Gesualdo ROBINSON MILLER LLC One Newark Center, 19th Floor Newark, New Jersey 07102 Telephone:
More informationCase 1:12-cv SLR Document 18 Filed 08/27/12 Page 1 of 17 PageID #: 71 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE
Case 1:12-cv-00809-SLR Document 18 Filed 08/27/12 Page 1 of 17 PageID #: 71 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE PFIZER INC., WYETH LLC, WYETH PHARMACEUTICALS INC., and PF PRISM
More informationCase 1:16-cv UNA Document 1 Filed 04/07/16 Page 1 of 17 PageID #: 1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )
Case 1:16-cv-00237-UNA Document 1 Filed 04/07/16 Page 1 of 17 PageID #: 1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE FRESENIUS KABI USA, LLC, Plaintiff, v. MAIA PHARMACEUTICALS, INC., Defendant.
More informationCase 1:12-cv RBW Document 9 Filed 12/03/12 Page 1 of 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
Case 1:12-cv-01936-RBW Document 9 Filed 12/03/12 Page 1 of 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA ENDO PHARMACEUTICALS INC., Plaintiff, v. Civil Action 12-1936 (RBW UNITED STATES FOOD
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS DIVISION
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS DIVISION GALDERMA LABORATORIES, L.P., GALDERMA S.A., and GALDERMA RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT, S.N.C., v. Plaintiffs, ACTAVIS LABORATORIES
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Plaintiffs, ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Defendants.
Case 1:16-cv-01350 Document 1 Filed 06/28/16 Page 1 of 19 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA LANNETT COMPANY, INC., 13200 Townsend Road, Philadelphia, PA 19154 and LANNETT
More informationCase 1:07-cv RMU Document 71-2 Filed 05/08/2007 Page 1 of 6. ANDA , Amlodipine Besylate Tablets, 2.5 mg, 5 mg, and 10 mg.
Case 1:07-cv-00579-RMU Document 71-2 Filed 05/08/2007 Page 1 of 6 DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH & HUMAN SERVICES ANDA 76-719, Amlodipine Besylate Tablets, 2.5 mg, 5 mg, and 10 mg. SENT BY FACSIMILE AND U.S. MAIL
More informationI'D [3, 2 7 ~ ~ a Anthony Figg Lisa N. Phillips
4 j ROTHWELL, FIGG, ERNST & MANBECK, P.c. 1425 K Street, N.W. G. Franklin Rothwell Anne M. Sterba Suite 800 6045 7 I'D [3, 2 7 ~ ~ a Anthony Figg Lisa N. Phillips Washington, D.C. 20005 : i-_. f~ ~azbara
More informationHealth Care Law Monthly
Health Care Law Monthly February 2013 Volume 2013 * Issue No. 2 Contents: Copyright ß 2013 Matthew Bender & Company, Inc., a member of the Lexis- Nexis group of companies. All rights reserved. HEALTH CARE
More informationA. Bayer's New Drug Application for Precose
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH & HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration Rockville, MD 20857 William A. Rakoczy, Esq. Rakoczy, Molino, Mazzochi & Siwik, LLP 6 West Hubbard St. Suite 500 Chicago, IL 60610 Dear
More informationFrom PLI s Program New Strategies Arising from the Hatch-Waxman Amendments #4888
From PLI s Program New Strategies Arising from the Hatch-Waxman Amendments #4888 New Strategies Arising From the Hatch-Waxman Amendments Practicing Law Institute Telephone Briefing May 12, 2004 I. INTRODUCTION
More informationCase 1:10-cv UNA Document 1 Filed 10/05/10 Page 1 of 20
Case 1:10-cv-00852-UNA Document 1 Filed 10/05/10 Page 1 of 20 Case 1:10-cv-00852-UNA Document 1 Filed 10/05/10 Page 2 of 20 4. Plaintiff Allergan Sales, LLC is a corporation organized and existing under
More informationTeva Pharmaceuticals USA Attention: Scott Tomsky Vice President, U.S. Generics Regulatory Affairs 425 Privet Road Horsham, PA 19044
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH & HUMAN SERVICES ANDA 091028 Food and Drug Administration Silver Spring, MD 20993 Teva Pharmaceuticals USA Attention: Scott Tomsky Vice President, U.S. Generics Regulatory Affairs
More informationCase 2:15-cv WHW-CLW Document 1 Filed 04/10/15 Page 1 of 81 PageID: 1
Case 2:15-cv-02571-WHW-CLW Document 1 Filed 04/10/15 Page 1 of 81 PageID: 1 Walter W. Brown U.S. Department of Justice 1100 L. St. N.W. Washington, D.C. 20005 (202) 307-0341 walter.brown2@usdoj.gov Attorneys
More informationCase 1:07-cv RMU Document 81 Filed 06/27/2007 Page 1 of 14 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
Case 1:07-cv-00579-RMU Document 81 Filed 06/27/2007 Page 1 of 14 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA MYLAN LABORATORIES, INC., et al., Plaintiffs, v. Civil Action No. 07-0579 (RMU
More informationCase 1:15-cv RMB-JS Document 1 Filed 10/09/15 Page 1 of 14 PageID: 1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY
Case 1:15-cv-07415-RMB-JS Document 1 Filed 10/09/15 Page 1 of 14 PageID: 1 John E. Flaherty Ravin R. Patel McCARTER & ENGLISH LLP Four Gateway Center 100 Mulberry Street Newark, New Jersey 07102 (973)
More informationCase 1:18-cv UNA Document 1 Filed 03/27/18 Page 1 of 87 PageID #: 4 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE
Case 1:18-cv-00466-UNA Document 1 Filed 03/27/18 Page 1 of 87 PageID #: 4 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE GILEAD SCIENCES, INC. and GILEAD PHARMASSET LLC, Plaintiffs, v.
More informationCase 2:09-cv DMC-MF Document 17 Filed 04/20/2009 Page 1 of 28 : :
Case 2:09-cv-01302-DMC-MF Document 17 Filed 04/20/2009 Page 1 of 28 WINSTON & STRAWN LLP The Legal Center One Riverfront Plaza, 7th Floor Newark, New Jersey 07102 (973) 848-7676 James S. Richter Attorneys
More informationCase 1:16-cv UNA Document 1 Filed 01/15/16 Page 1 of 13 PageID #: 1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE
Case 1:16-cv-00015-UNA Document 1 Filed 01/15/16 Page 1 of 13 PageID #: 1 PROSTRAKAN, INC. and STRAKAN INTERNATIONAL S.á r.l., IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE v. Plaintiffs,
More informationThe Patented Medicines (Notice of Compliance) Regulations: What patents are eligible to be listed on the register?
The Patented Medicines (Notice of Compliance) Regulations: What patents are eligible to be listed on the register? Edward Hore Hazzard & Hore 141 Adelaide Street West, Suite 1002 Toronto, ON M5H 3L5 (416)
More informationCase 1:09-cv UNA Document 1 Filed 07/13/2009 Page 1 of 17
Case 1:09-cv-00511-UNA Document 1 Filed 07/13/2009 Page 1 of 17 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE ALLERGAN, INC., ALLERGAN USA, INC., ALLERGAN SALES, LLC, ENDO PHARMACEUTICALS
More informationAttachment C M AY Daniel J. Tomasch, Esq. Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP 666 Fifth Ave. New York, NY Dear Mr.
DEPARTMENT OF Hr.PILTH & HUMAN SERVICES Health Service Public Food and Drug Administration R ockviue MD 20857 Daniel J. Tomasch, Esq. Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP 666 Fifth Ave. New York, NY 10103
More informationCase 1:18-cv UNA Document 1 Filed 01/19/18 Page 1 of 14 PageID #: 1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE
Case 1:18-cv-00117-UNA Document 1 Filed 01/19/18 Page 1 of 14 PageID #: 1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE TEVA PHARMACEUTICALS INTERNATIONAL GMBH, CEPHALON, INC., and EAGLE
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY ) THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA ) and THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF ) THE UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS, ) Civil Action No. ) Plaintiffs, ) COMPLAINT FOR ) PATENT
More informationCase 1:18-cv LPS Document 1 Filed 01/12/18 Page 1 of 17 PageID #: 1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE
Case 1:18-cv-00092-LPS Document 1 Filed 01/12/18 Page 1 of 17 PageID #: 1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE H. LUNDBECK A/S, TAKEDA PHARMACEUTICAL COMPANY LTD., TAKEDA PHARMACEUTICALS
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE UCB, INC., UCB MANUFACTURING IRELAND LIMITED, UCB PHARMA GMBH, and LTS LOHMANN THERAPIE-SYSTEME AG, v. Plaintiffs. ZYDUS WORLDWIDE DMCC,
More informationCase 1:16-cv UNA Document 1 Filed 09/30/16 Page 1 of 11 PageID #: 1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE
Case 1:16-cv-00886-UNA Document 1 Filed 09/30/16 Page 1 of 11 PageID #: 1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE PFIZER INC. and UCB PHARMA GMBH, v. Plaintiffs, AUROBINDO PHARMA
More informationAn ANDA Update. June 2004 Bulletin 04-50
June 2004 Bulletin 04-50 If you have questions or would like additional information on the material covered in this Bulletin, please contact one of the authors: Mark R. Shanks 202.414.9201 mshanks@reedsmith.com
More informationLupin Pharmaceutkals,Inc.
Lupin Pharmaceutkals,Inc. 1011 1 9 A 8 : 43 VIA FEDERAL EXPRESS Division of Documents Management Food and Drug Administration Department of Health and Human Services 5630 Fishers Lane Room 1061 Rockville,
More informationCase 3:18-cv FLW-LHG Document 1 Filed 01/26/18 Page 1 of 25 PageID: 1
Case 3:18-cv-01097-FLW-LHG Document 1 Filed 01/26/18 Page 1 of 25 PageID: 1 Cynthia S. Betz Ravin R. Patel McCARTER & ENGLISH LLP Four Gateway Center 100 Mulberry Street Newark, New Jersey 07102 (973)
More informationAmendments to Regulations on Citizen Petitions, Petitions for Stay of Action, and Submission of
This document is scheduled to be published in the Federal Register on 11/08/2016 and available online at https://federalregister.gov/d/2016-26912, and on FDsys.gov 4164-01-P DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN
More information2013 PA Super 215. Appellants No. 83 EDA 2012
2013 PA Super 215 IN RE: REGLAN/METOCLOPRAMIDE LITIGATION, IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA APPEAL OF: MORTON GROVE PHARMACEUTICALS INC., AND WOCKHARDT USA, LLC, Appellants No. 83 EDA 2012 Appeal
More informationThe Consumer Healthcare Products Association (CHPA) submits these. comments on the proposal published by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in 64
February 28, 2000 Dockets Management Branch (HFA-305) Food and Drug Administration 5630 Fishers Lane, Room 1061 Rockville, MD 20852 Re: FDA Proposal to Revise the Citizen Petition Regulation, 64 Fed. Reg.
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS DIVISION COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS DIVISION GALDERMA LABORATORIES, L.P., GALDERMA S.A., and GALDERMA RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT, S.N.C., v. Plaintiffs, ACTAVIS MID
More informationFormal Dispute Resolution: Appeals Above the Division Level Guidance for Industry and Review Staff
Formal Dispute Resolution: Appeals Above the Division Level Guidance for Industry and Review Staff Good Review Practice DRAFT GUIDANCE This guidance document is being distributed for comment purposes only.
More informationCase 3:12-cv PGS-LHG Document 1 Filed 06/25/12 Page 1 of 41 PageID: 1
Case 3:12-cv-03893-PGS-LHG Document 1 Filed 06/25/12 Page 1 of 41 PageID: 1 Liza M. Walsh CONNELL FOLEY LLP 85 Livingston Avenue Roseland, New Jersey 07068 (973) 535-0500 Of Counsel: Dimitrios T. Drivas
More informationPharmaceutical Patent Settlement Cases: Mixed Signals for Settling Patent Litigation
By Margaret J. Simpson Tel: 312 923-2857 Fax: 312 840-7257 E-mail: msimpson@jenner.com The following article originally appeared in the Spring 2004 issue of the Illinois State Bar Association s Antitrust
More information21 C.F.R DEFINITIONS
SECTION-BY-SECTION REDLINE OF FDA S FINAL REGULATIONS ON ANDAS AND 505(b)(2) APPLICATIONS TO IMPLEMENT TITLE XI OF THE MMA 21 C.F.R. 314.3 DEFINITIONS (a) The definitions and interpretations contained
More informationSegal McCambridge Singer & Mahoney, Ltd Market Street, Suite 2600 Philadelphia, PA (215) Fax: (215) : : : : : : : : : :
Theodore C. Flowers, Esquire tflowers@smsm.com Attorney Identification No. 82218 Segal McCambridge Singer & Mahoney, Ltd. 1818 Market Street, Suite 2600 Philadelphia, PA 19103 (215) 972-8015 Fax (215)
More informationPENDING LEGISLATION REGULATING PATENT INFRINGEMENT SETTLEMENTS
PENDING LEGISLATION REGULATING PATENT INFRINGEMENT SETTLEMENTS By Edward W. Correia* A number of bills have been introduced in the United States Congress this year that are intended to eliminate perceived
More information~ln $~e OFR.C.E OF_THE CLERK t reme ourt i mte tate PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI
Supreme Court, U.S. FILED No. 09- --09-98 ~ln $~e OFR.C.E OF_THE CLERK t reme ourt i mte tate PLIVA, INC.; TEVA PHARMACEUTICALS USA, INC.; UDL LABORATORIES, INC., Petitioners, V. GLADYS MENSING, Respondent.
More informationCase 1:11-cv RGA Document 10 Filed 01/13/12 Page 1 of 14 PageID #: 47
Case 1:11-cv-01105-RGA Document 10 Filed 01/13/12 Page 1 of 14 PageID #: 47 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE WARNER CHILCOTT COMPANY, LLC, v. Plaintiff, ZYDUS PHARMACEUTICALS
More informationFDA Regulatory February 18, 2015
ROPES & GRAY ALERT FDA Regulatory February 18, 2015 Orange Book Patent Listing and Patent Certifications: Key Provisions in FDA s Proposed Regulations Implementing the Medicare Modernization Act of 2003
More informationCase 1:16-cv UNA Document 1 Filed 10/13/16 Page 1 of 17 PageID #: 1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE
Case 1:16-cv-00942-UNA Document 1 Filed 10/13/16 Page 1 of 17 PageID #: 1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE ASTELLAS PHARMA INC., ASTELLAS IRELAND CO., LTD., and ASTELLAS
More informationFDA, PATENT TERM EXTENSIONS AND THE HATCH WAXMAN ACT. Dr.Sumesh Reddy- Dr. Reddys Lab Hyderabad-
FDA, PATENT TERM EXTENSIONS AND THE HATCH WAXMAN ACT Dr.Sumesh Reddy- Dr. Reddys Lab Hyderabad- FDA Regulatory approval-time and cost Focus of FDA approval process-safety and efficacy Difference between
More informationPatent and Exclusivity Update
Patent and Exclusivity Update Martin Shimer Deputy Director Division of Legal and Regulatory Support Office of Generic Drug Policy October 25, 2016 Agenda Patent and Exclusivity Team(PET) Introduction:
More informationA New History and Discussion of 180-Day Exclusivity
University of Missouri School of Law Scholarship Repository Faculty Publications 2009 A New History and Discussion of 180-Day Exclusivity Erika Lietzan University of Missouri School of Law, lietzane@missouri.edu
More informationProposal to Refuse to Approve a New Drug Application for Oxycodone Hydrochloride
This document is scheduled to be published in the Federal Register on 02/13/2018 and available online at https://federalregister.gov/d/2018-02903, and on FDsys.gov 4164-01-P DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN
More informationCase 1:17-cv UNA Document 1 Filed 12/22/17 Page 1 of 10 PageID #: 1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE
Case 1:17-cv-01844-UNA Document 1 Filed 12/22/17 Page 1 of 10 PageID #: 1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE AMGEN INC., v. Plaintiff, TORRENT PHARMACEUTICALS LTD. and TORRENT
More informationCase 2:15-cv WHW-CLW Document 1 Filed 08/31/15 Page 1 of 145 PageID: 1
Case 2:15-cv-06541-WHW-CLW Document 1 Filed 08/31/15 Page 1 of 145 PageID: 1 Charles M. Lizza William C. Baton SAUL EWING LLP One Riverfront Plaza, Suite 1520 Newark, New Jersey 07102-5426 (973) 286-6700
More informationCase 1:14-cv SLR-SRF Document 61 Filed 05/22/15 Page 1 of 20 PageID #: 634 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE
Case 1:14-cv-01083-SLR-SRF Document 61 Filed 05/22/15 Page 1 of 20 PageID #: 634 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE UCB, INC., UCB MANUFACTURING IRELAND LIMITED, UCB PHARMA
More informationCase 3:15-cv MAS-LHG Document 1 Filed 04/06/15 Page 1 of 38 PageID: 1
Case 3:15-cv-02520-MAS-LHG Document 1 Filed 04/06/15 Page 1 of 38 PageID: 1 Liza M. Walsh, Esq. CONNELL FOLEY LLP 85 Livingston Avenue Roseland, New Jersey 07068-1765 (973) 535-0500 Of Counsel: William
More informationCase 1:08-cv Document 1 Filed 02/04/2008 Page 1 of 7 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS FOREST LABORATORIES, INC., FOREST LABORATORIES HOLDINGS, LTD., MERZ PHARMA GMBH & CO. KGAA, and MERZ PHARMACEUTICALS GMBH, Plaintiffs,
More informationPATENT, TRADEMARK & COPYRIGHT!
A BNA s PATENT, TRADEMARK & COPYRIGHT! JOURNAL Reproduced with permission from BNA s Patent, Trademark & Copyright Journal, 81 PTCJ 36, 11/05/2010. Copyright 2010 by The Bureau of National Affairs, Inc.
More informationUnited States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit 2009-1071 ELI LILLY AND COMPANY, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. TEVA PHARMACEUTICALS USA, INC., Defendant-Appellant. Charles E. Lipsey, Finnegan, Henderson,
More information21 CFR Part 50 - Protection of Human Subjects
21 CFR Part 50 - Protection of Human Subjects Subpart A General Provisions 50.1 Scope. 50.3 Definitions. Subpart B Informed Consent of Human Subjects 50.20 General requirements for informed consent. 50.21
More informationCaraco V. Novo Nordisk: Antitrust Implications
Portfolio Media. Inc. 860 Broadway, 6th Floor New York, NY 10003 www.law360.com Phone: +1 646 783 7100 Fax: +1 646 783 7161 customerservice@law360.com Caraco V. Novo Nordisk: Antitrust Implications Law360,
More informationCase 2:14-cv HB Document 439 Filed 06/29/18 Page 1 of 102 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA : : : : :
Case 2:14-cv-05151-HB Document 439 Filed 06/29/18 Page 1 of 102 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION v. ABBVIE INC., et al. : : : : : CIVIL
More informationCase 5:13-cv SMH-MLH Document 1 Filed 06/20/13 Page 1 of 11 PageID #: 1
Case 5:13-cv-01983-SMH-MLH Document 1 Filed 06/20/13 Page 1 of 11 PageID #: 1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA SHREVEPORT DIVISION UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. Plaintiff,
More informationCase 3:11-cv JAP -TJB Document 32 Filed 07/06/11 Page 1 of 19 PageID: 530 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY
Case 3:11-cv-03111-JAP -TJB Document 32 Filed 07/06/11 Page 1 of 19 PageID: 530 NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY : NOSTRUM PHARMACEUTICALS, LLC, : : Plaintiff,
More informationProduct Improvements and Life Cycle Management Antitrust Pitfalls
Product Improvements and Life Cycle Management Antitrust Pitfalls NJ IP Law Association's 26th Annual Pharmaceutical/Chemical Patent Practice Update Paul Ragusa December 5, 2012 2012 Product Improvements
More informationBNA s Patent, Trademark & Copyright Journal
BNA s Patent, Trademark & Copyright Journal Reproduced with permission from BNA s Patent, Trademark & Copyright Journal, 91 PTCJ 1505, 3/25/16. Copyright 2016 by The Bureau of National Affairs, Inc. (800-372-1033)
More informationCase 1:10-cv MGC Document 11-1 Filed 11/18/10 Page 1 of 55 EXHIBIT A
Case 1:10-cv-08386-MGC Document 11-1 Filed 11/18/10 Page 1 of 55 EXHIBIT A Case 1:10-cv-08386-MGC Document 11-1 Filed 11/18/10 Page 2 of 55 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW
More informationPatent Infringement and Experimental Use Under the Hatch-Waxman Act: Current Issues
Patent Infringement and Experimental Use Under the Hatch-Waxman Act: Current Issues John R. Thomas Visiting Scholar February 9, 2012 CRS Report for Congress Prepared for Members and Committees of Congress
More informationCase 1:15-cv LPS Document 118 Filed 05/10/16 Page 1 of 11 PageID #: 2856 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE
Case 1:15-cv-00164-LPS Document 118 Filed 05/10/16 Page 1 of 11 PageID #: 2856 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE COSMO TECHNOLOGIES LIMITED, VALEANT PHARMACEUTICALS INTERNATIONAL,
More informationThe Korean Drug Approval-Patent Linkage System: A Comparison with the US Hatch-Waxman Act
FEBRUARY 2015 The Korean Drug Approval-Patent Linkage System: A Comparison with the US Hatch-Waxman Act Authors: Ki Young Kim, Hyunsuk Jin, Samuel SungMok Lee Pursuant to the implementation of the Korea-US
More informationPreemption in Nonprescription Drug Cases
drug and medical device Over the Counter and Under the Radar By James F. Rogers, Julie A. Flaming and Jane T. Davis Preemption in Nonprescription Drug Cases Although it must be considered on a case-by-case
More informationUnited States. Country QUESTIONNAIRE
Annex to C. SCIT 2505 Country United States QUESTIONNAIRE ON THE GRANT AND PUBLICATION OF SUPPLEMENTARY PROTECTION CERTIFICATES FOR MEDICINAL AND PHYTOPHARMACEUTICAL PRODUCTS OR EQUIVALENT INDUSTRIAL PROPERTY
More informationCase 3:16-cv MAS-LHG Document 1 Filed 09/16/16 Page 1 of 14 PageID: 1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY
Case 3:16-cv-05678-MAS-LHG Document 1 Filed 09/16/16 Page 1 of 14 PageID: 1 Liza M. Walsh Tricia B. O Reilly Katelyn O Reilly WALSH PIZZI O REILLY FALANGA LLP 1037 Raymond Boulevard, Suite 600 Newark,
More informationCase 2:11-cv WHW -MCA Document 7 Filed 09/12/11 Page 1 of 17 PageID: 57
Case 2:11-cv-03995-WHW -MCA Document 7 Filed 09/12/11 Page 1 of 17 PageID: 57 James E. Cecchi (JCecchi@carellabyrne.com) Melissa E. Flax (mflax@carellabyrne.com) CARELLA, BYRNE, CECCHI, OLSTEIN, BRODY
More informationCase 1:10-cv UNA Document 1 Filed 10/25/10 Page 1 of 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )
Case 1:10-cv-00912-UNA Document 1 Filed 10/25/10 Page 1 of 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE ABBOTT LABORATORIES and WISCONSIN ALUMNI RESEARCH FOUNDATION, v. Plaintiffs,
More informationCase 1:09-cv JJF Document 36 Filed 02/09/10 Page 1 of 22 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE
Case 1:09-cv-00651-JJF Document 36 Filed 02/09/10 Page 1 of 22 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE BRISTOL-MYERS SQUIBB CO., and BRISTOL-MYERS SQUIBB PHARMA CO. Plaintiffs,
More informationCase 1:10-cv JCJ Document 20 Filed 04/14/10 Page 1 of 12 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE
Case 110-cv-00137-JCJ Document 20 Filed 04/14/10 Page 1 of 12 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE MILLENNIUM PHARMACEUTICALS, INC. and SCHERING CORP., Plaintiffs, CIVIL ACTION
More informationCase 1:10-mc CKK -AK Document 31 Filed 07/13/10 Page 1 of 12 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
Case 1:10-mc-00289-CKK -AK Document 31 Filed 07/13/10 Page 1 of 12 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION, Petitioner, v. PAUL M. BISARO, Misc. No. 10-289 (CKK)(AK)
More informationCase 1:17-cv UNA Document 1 Filed 10/20/17 Page 1 of 8 PageID #: 1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE
Case 1:17-cv-01481-UNA Document 1 Filed 10/20/17 Page 1 of 8 PageID #: 1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE FOREST LABORATORIES, LLC, FOREST LABORATORIES HOLDINGS, LTD., ALLERGAN
More informationCase 1:11-cv LPS Document 497 Filed 05/20/14 Page 1 of 9 PageID #: IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE
Case 1:11-cv-00704-LPS Document 497 Filed 05/20/14 Page 1 of 9 PageID #: 17900 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE AVANIR PHARMACEUTICALS, INC., AVANIR HOLDING COMPANY, AND
More informationCase 8:14-cv GJH Document 1 Filed 08/19/14 Page 1 of 22
Case 8:14-cv-02662-GJH Document 1 Filed 08/19/14 Page 1 of 22 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MARYLAND Hospira, Inc. 275 N. Field Drive Lake Forest, IL 60045, v. Plaintiff, Sylvia
More informationNo IN THE EISAI CO. LTD AND EISAI MEDICAL RESEARCH, INC., TEVA PHARMACEUTICALS USA, INC., through its GATE PHARMACEUTICALS Division,
No. 10-1070 ~[~ 2 7 7.i~[ IN THE EISAI CO. LTD AND EISAI MEDICAL RESEARCH, INC., Petitioners, TEVA PHARMACEUTICALS USA, INC., through its GATE PHARMACEUTICALS Division, Respondent. ON PETITION FOR A WRIT
More informationSUCCESSFULLY LITIGATING METHOD OF USE PATENTS IN THE U.S.
SUCCESSFULLY LITIGATING METHOD OF USE PATENTS IN THE U.S. The 10 th Annual Generics, Supergenerics, and Patent Strategies Conference London, England May 16, 2007 Provided by: Charles R. Wolfe, Jr. H. Keeto
More informationRecent developments in US law: Remedies and damages for improper patent listings in the FDA s Orange Book
Daniel G. Brown is a partner in the New York law firm Frommer Lawrence & Haug, LLP, and practises extensively in the Hatch Waxman area. He has been practising in New York since 1993 in the patent and intellectual
More informationCase 1:14-cv IMK Document 125 Filed 06/16/14 Page 1 of 21 PageID #: 1959
Case 1:14-cv-00075-IMK Document 125 Filed 06/16/14 Page 1 of 21 PageID #: 1959 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF WEST VIRGINIA MYLAN PHARMACEUTICALS, INC., Plaintiff, WATSON
More informationCase 3:10-cv JAP -TJB Document 1 Filed 08/16/10 Page 1 of 13 PageID: 1
Case 3:10-cv-04205-JAP -TJB Document 1 Filed 08/16/10 Page 1 of 13 PageID: 1 John E. Flaherty Jonathan M.H. Short McCARTER & ENGLISH, LLP Four Gateway Center 100 Mulberry Street Newark, New Jersey 07109
More informationCase 1:17-cv Document 1 Filed 08/04/17 Page 1 of 15
Case 1:17-cv-01577 Document 1 Filed 08/04/17 Page 1 of 15 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA UNITED THERAPEUTICS CORPORATION, 1040 Spring Street Silver Spring, MD 20910 v.
More informationCase 1:16-cv RBK-JS Document 1 Filed 06/30/16 Page 1 of 14 PageID: 1
Case 1:16-cv-03910-RBK-JS Document 1 Filed 06/30/16 Page 1 of 14 PageID: 1 John E. Flaherty Ravin R. Patel McCARTER & ENGLISH LLP Four Gateway Center 100 Mulberry St. Newark, NJ 07102 (973) 622-4444 Attorneys
More informationCase 1:18-cv UNA Document 1 Filed 01/30/18 Page 1 of 8 PageID #: 1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE
Case 1:18-cv-00171-UNA Document 1 Filed 01/30/18 Page 1 of 8 PageID #: 1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE FOREST LABORATORIES HOLDINGS, LTD., ALLERGAN USA, INC., ALLERGAN
More informationPay-for-Delay Settlements: Antitrust Violation or Proper Exercise of Pharmaceutical Patent Rights?
Pay-for-Delay Settlements: Antitrust Violation or Proper Exercise of Pharmaceutical Patent Rights? By Kendyl Hanks, Sarah Jacobson, Kyle Musgrove, and Michael Shen In recent years, there has been a surge
More informationThe Hatch-Waxman Act and Market Exclusivity for Generic Manufacturers: An Entitlement or an Incentive
Chicago-Kent Law Review Volume 81 Issue 2 Symposium: Secrecy in Litigation Article 13 April 2006 The Hatch-Waxman Act and Market Exclusivity for Generic Manufacturers: An Entitlement or an Incentive Ashlee
More information