Litigation Details for ELI LILLY AND COMPANY v. APOTEX INC. (S.D. Ind. 2016)

✉ Email this page to a colleague

Docket	⤷ Sign Up	Date Filed	2016-06-20
Court	District Court, S.D. Indiana	Date Terminated	2017-12-04
Cause	35:271 Patent Infringement	Assigned To	William T. Lawrence
Jury Demand	None	Referred To	Debra Mcvicker Lynch
Parties	ACRUX DDS PTY LTD.
Patents	8,419,307; 9,289,586
Attorneys	Anne N. DePrez
Firms	Finnegan Henderson Farabow Garrett & Dunner
Link to Docket	External link to docket

The small molecule drug covered by the patents cited in this case is ⤷ Sign Up .

Subscribe to access the full database, or Sign Up
Date Filed	Document No.	Description	Snippet	Link To Document
0000-00-00				External link to document
2017-02-07	81		spreading implement patents at issue in this case (the ’861 Patent and U.S. Patent Nos. 8,419,307; 8,177,449;…asserting various claims of patent infringement as to seven of the patents related to Axiron (hereinafter…hereinafter referred to collectively as “the Patents”). The Patents are owned by Plaintiff Acrux DDS PTY Ltd…those ANDAs infringed upon nine patents, including five of the seven patents at issue in this case.1 After…inter alia, one claim in one of the Patents in this case (“the ’944 Patent”) 2 invalid and finding two claims	External link to document
2017-05-03	86		spreading implement patents at issue in this case (the ’861 Patent and U.S. Patent Nos. 8,419,307; 8,177,449;…than just the applicator patents. The claims with regard to the applicator patents do, indeed, appear to…sue the Defendants with regard to four of the patents on which the Plaintiffs sued in this case (hereinafter…hereinafter referred to as the “applicator patents”). The Defendants fault the Plaintiffs for failing to…failure to inform the Court that the applicator patents are no longer at issue.” Dkt. No. 83 at 2. 1	External link to document
>Date Filed	>Document No.	>Description	>Snippet	>Link To Document