Actelion Pharmaceuticals US, Inc. et al v. Lannett Company, Inc.: A Comprehensive Litigation Summary and Analysis
Case Overview
The lawsuit Actelion Pharmaceuticals US, Inc. et al v. Lannett Company, Inc. (Case No. 1:24-cv-01162) is a patent infringement case filed in the United States District Court for the District of Delaware. The plaintiffs include Actelion Pharmaceuticals US, Inc., Actelion Pharmaceuticals Ltd., and Shinyaku Co., Ltd., while the defendant is Lannett Company, Inc.[1][3][5].
Parties Involved
Plaintiffs: Actelion Pharmaceuticals US, Inc., a U.S. subsidiary of Actelion Pharmaceuticals Ltd., a Swiss corporation, and Shinyaku Co., Ltd., a Japanese corporation.
Defendant: Lannett Company, Inc., a Delaware corporation with its principal place of business in Pennsylvania.
Cause of Action
The primary cause of action is patent infringement under 35 U.S.C. § 271. The plaintiffs allege that Lannett’s activities related to the commercial manufacture, use, offer for sale, or sale of certain generic pharmaceutical products infringe on the plaintiffs’ patents, specifically the ‘122 and ‘280 patents[1][3][5].
Patents-in-Suit
The lawsuit centers around the infringement of two specific patents: the ‘122 and ‘280 patents. These patents are related to pharmaceutical products, and the plaintiffs claim that Lannett’s generic versions of these products infringe on their intellectual property rights[3].
Accused Products
Lannett is accused of developing, manufacturing, marketing, distributing, selling, and/or importing generic pharmaceutical versions of branded products that allegedly infringe the plaintiffs’ patents. These activities are said to occur within the United States, including within the judicial district of Delaware[3].
Jurisdiction and Court
The case is filed in the United States District Court for the District of Delaware, with Judge Gregory B. Williams presiding. The court has jurisdiction over this matter due to the nature of the claims, which involve federal patent laws[1][5].
Procedural History
Filing Date: The complaint was filed on October 17, 2024.
Latest Docket Entry: As of December 31, 2024, the docket has been updated to reflect various procedural motions, including an unopposed motion for an extension of time to file an answer by the plaintiffs[1][5].
Claims and Relief Sought
The plaintiffs seek several forms of relief:
Judgment of Infringement: A declaration that Lannett has infringed the ‘122 and ‘280 patents.
Monetary Relief: Compensation for any infringement that has occurred prior to the expiration of the patents, including prejudgment and post-judgment interest.
Injunctive Relief: An order enjoining Lannett from further infringing activities.
Attorneys’ Fees: An award of reasonable attorneys’ fees and expenses under 35 U.S.C. § 285, if the case is deemed exceptional[3].
Potential Impact
The outcome of this case could have significant implications for both parties. For the plaintiffs, a favorable judgment would protect their intellectual property rights and potentially prevent further infringement. For Lannett, a negative outcome could result in substantial monetary damages and the cessation of certain business activities related to the accused products[3].
Industry Context
This case is part of a broader landscape of patent litigation in the pharmaceutical industry, where companies frequently engage in legal battles to protect their intellectual property. The generic pharmaceutical market is highly competitive, and patent disputes are common as companies seek to enter the market with generic versions of branded drugs[3].
Key Takeaways
The case involves patent infringement claims related to generic pharmaceutical products.
The plaintiffs are seeking various forms of relief, including monetary and injunctive relief.
The case is ongoing in the District of Delaware with Judge Gregory B. Williams presiding.
The outcome could have significant implications for the pharmaceutical industry, particularly in the context of generic drug development and intellectual property protection.
FAQs
Q: What is the nature of the lawsuit against Lannett Company, Inc.?
A: The lawsuit is a patent infringement case filed by Actelion Pharmaceuticals US, Inc., Actelion Pharmaceuticals Ltd., and Shinyaku Co., Ltd. against Lannett Company, Inc.
Q: Which patents are at the center of the dispute?
A: The ‘122 and ‘280 patents are the patents alleged to be infringed by Lannett’s activities.
Q: Where is the case being heard?
A: The case is being heard in the United States District Court for the District of Delaware.
Q: What relief are the plaintiffs seeking?
A: The plaintiffs are seeking a judgment of infringement, monetary relief, injunctive relief, and attorneys’ fees.
Q: What could be the potential impact of this case on the pharmaceutical industry?
A: The case could set precedents for patent protection in the generic pharmaceutical market and impact how companies develop and market generic drugs.
Cited Sources
Insight.rpxcorp.com: Actelion Pharmaceuticals US, Inc. et al v. Lannett Company, Inc. DC.
ClassAction.org: Wisdom et al. v. Wag Hotels, Inc. (Not directly relevant but used for procedural context).
Insight.rpxcorp.com: IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT … Case 1:24-cv-01162-UNA Document 1 Filed 10/17/24.
Justia.com: Andor Pharmaceuticals, LLC v. Lannett Company, Inc. (Not directly relevant but used for context on Lannett Company, Inc.).
PacerMonitor.com: Actelion Pharmaceuticals US, Inc. et al v. Lannett Company, Inc.
