Litigation Details for Allergan USA, Inc. v. Aurobindo Pharma Ltd. (D. Del. 2019)

Allergan USA, Inc. v. Aurobindo Pharma Ltd. (D. Del. 2019)

Docket		Date Filed	2019-09-06
Court	District Court, D. Delaware	Date Terminated	2022-02-09
Cause	35:271 Patent Infringement	Assigned To	Richard Gibson Andrews
Jury Demand	None	Referred To
Parties	AUROBINDO PHARMA LTD.
Patents	10,213,415; 7,741,356; 7,786,158; 8,344,011; 8,609,709; 8,772,325; 9,205,076; 9,700,542
Attorneys	Kenneth Laurence Dorsney
Firms	Morris, Nichols, Arsht & Tunnell
Link to Docket	External link to docket

Details for Allergan USA, Inc. v. Aurobindo Pharma Ltd. (D. Del. 2019)

Date Filed	Document No.	Description	Snippet	Link To Document
2019-09-06				External link to document
2019-09-06	1	Complaint	076 patent"), 9,700,542 ("the '542 patent"), and 10,213,415 ("the '415 patent…356 patent, the '158 patent, the '011 patent, the '709 patent, the '325 patent, the…356 patent, the '158 patent, the '011 patent, the '709 patent, the '325 patent, the…356 patent, the '158 patent, the '011 patent, the '709 patent, the '325 patent, the…The '356 patent, the '158 patent, the '011 patent, the '709 patent, the '325	External link to document
2019-09-06	72	Stipulation-General (See Motion List for Stipulation to Extend Time)	8,609,709, 8,772,325, 9,205,076, 9,700,542, 10,213,415 by Allergan Holdings Unlimited Company, Allergan Pharmaceuticals… STIPULATION Concerning Infringement of U.S. Patent Nos. 7,741,356, 7,786,158, 8,344,011, 8,609,709…2019 9 February 2022 1:19-cv-01674 835 Patent - Abbreviated New Drug Application(ANDA) None	External link to document
2019-09-06	73	Order	of U.S. Patent Nos. 7,741,356; 7,786,158; 8,344,011; 8,609,709; 8,722,325; 9,205,542; 10,213,415. Signed…2019 9 February 2022 1:19-cv-01674 835 Patent - Abbreviated New Drug Application(ANDA) None	External link to document
2019-09-06	83	Patent/Trademark Report to Commissioner of Patents	B2; 8,772,325 B2; 9,205,076 B2; 9,700,542 B2; 10,213,415 B2. (Attachments: # 1 Order)(nms) (Entered: 02… Report to the Commissioner of Patents and Trademarks for Patent/Trademark Number(s) 7,741,356 B2; …2019 9 February 2022 1:19-cv-01674 835 Patent - Abbreviated New Drug Application(ANDA) None	External link to document

Allergan USA, Inc. v. Aurobindo Pharma Ltd.: A Comprehensive Litigation Summary and Analysis

Case Overview

The litigation between Allergan USA, Inc. and Aurobindo Pharma Ltd., filed as Civil Action No. 1:19-cv-01674 in the United States District Court for the District of Delaware, involves a complex patent infringement dispute. Here is a detailed summary and analysis of the key aspects of this case.

Parties Involved

• Plaintiffs: Allergan USA, Inc., Allergan Holdings Unlimited Company, and Eden Biodesign, LLC.
• Defendants: Aurobindo Pharma Ltd. and Aurobindo Pharma USA, Inc.[1][2][3].

Cause of Action and Market Sector

The lawsuit centers on patent infringement under 35 U.S.C. § 271, specifically related to the biotech and pharmaceutical market sector. The dispute involves several patents related to pharmaceutical products, including those for eluxadoline and other compounds[1][2][3].

Patents-in-Suit

The litigation involves multiple patents, including:

• U.S. Patent Nos. 8,691,860, 9,115,091, 9,364,489, 9,789,125, 9,675,587, and 10,188,632.
• These patents pertain to various pharmaceutical formulations and methods of treatment[2].

Claim Construction and Intrinsic Evidence

A significant aspect of the case was the claim construction of various terms in the patents. The court considered the parties' joint claim construction brief and heard oral arguments. The plaintiffs argued that their proposed construction was supported by intrinsic evidence, such as the specification's language, which differentiated between "dose" and "daily dose"[2].

Defendants' Arguments and Court Rulings

The defendants proposed alternative constructions, which the plaintiffs argued would violate multiple rules of claim construction. The court ultimately had to decide on the proper interpretation of the patent claims, which is crucial for determining infringement and validity[2].

Litigation Timeline and Key Filings

• Filing Date: September 6, 2019.
• Latest Docket Entry: February 24, 2022.
• Case Closure: February 9, 2022[1].
• The case involved several key filings, including a first amended complaint, stipulations for consolidating and extending time, and reports to the Commissioner of Patents and Trademarks[3].

Judicial Proceedings and Decisions

Judge Richard G. Andrews presided over the case. The court heard oral arguments on December 21, 2020, and made decisions on claim construction and other critical issues. The case was part of a broader set of litigations involving Allergan and various generic pharmaceutical companies[2][3].

Related Litigations and Appeals

This case is part of a larger landscape of patent litigations involving Allergan. For instance, Allergan also litigated against other companies like Sun Pharmaceutical Industries Limited and MSN Laboratories Private Ltd., involving similar issues of patent validity and infringement[4].

Industry Impact and Legal Precedents

The outcome of this case has significant implications for the pharmaceutical industry, particularly in the context of generic drug approvals and patent protections. The court's decisions on claim construction and validity can set precedents for future patent disputes[2][4].

Key Takeaways

• Patent Infringement: The case highlights the complexities of patent infringement litigation in the pharmaceutical sector.
• Claim Construction: The court's interpretation of patent claims is crucial for determining infringement and validity.
• Industry Implications: The case has broader implications for generic drug approvals and patent protections in the pharmaceutical industry.
• Legal Precedents: The decisions made in this case can set important precedents for future patent disputes.

FAQs

Q: What is the main issue in the Allergan USA, Inc. v. Aurobindo Pharma Ltd. litigation?

A: The main issue is patent infringement related to several pharmaceutical patents, specifically involving the interpretation and validity of these patents.

Q: Which court is presiding over this case?

A: The United States District Court for the District of Delaware, with Judge Richard G. Andrews presiding.

Q: What are the key patents involved in this litigation?

A: The patents include U.S. Patent Nos. 8,691,860, 9,115,091, 9,364,489, 9,789,125, 9,675,587, and 10,188,632.

Q: What is the significance of claim construction in this case?

A: Claim construction is critical as it determines the scope of the patents and whether the defendants' products infringe on these patents.

Q: Are there related litigations involving Allergan?

A: Yes, Allergan is involved in other patent litigations with companies like Sun Pharmaceutical Industries Limited and MSN Laboratories Private Ltd.

Sources:

1. Insight.rpxcorp.com: Allergan USA, Inc. et al v. Aurobindo Pharma Ltd. et al DC.
2. Casetext.com: Allergan U.S., Inc. v. Aurobindo Pharma Ltd.
3. Justia Dockets & Filings: Allergan USA, Inc. et al v. Aurobindo Pharma Ltd. et al.
4. CAFC.uscourts.gov: ALLERGAN USA, INC. v. MSN LABORATORIES PRIVATE LTD.