| 0000-00-00 |
|
|
|
External link to document |
| 2016-08-08 |
129 |
Response in Opposition to Motion |
9,393,238 issued July 19, 2016 and is assigned to Celgene. Ex. 53, App. at
1065. It claims a method… ’124 patent contributed to
your conclusion that the claims of the ’124 patent lack written…potentially, thousands of patents and dozens of Lilly’s.
10
We will return to the patent at issue in Avanir…To Existing Patents, Including Lilly’s
There are 27,465 United States patents with claims …numerous patents that could be dramatically impacted by Lilly’s argument. For
example, U.S. Patent No. 9,393,238 |
External link to document |
| 2016-08-08 |
130 |
Exhibit 65 - U.S. Patent RE38,115 E |
463756A1, # 4 Exhibit 53 - U.S. Patent 9,393,238, # 5 Exhibit 54 - Lilly Patents with Claim Term Inhibitor,…Inhibitor, # 6 Exhibit 55 - U. S. Patent 5,674,887, # 7 Exhibit 56 - U.S. Patent 6,451,807, # 8 Exhibit 57 - Sybertz…2009), # 19 Exhibit 68 - U.S. Patent 6,245,802, # 20 Exhibit 69 - U.S. Patent 6,492,371, # 21 Exhibit 70 … Sybertz (1995), # 9 Exhibit 58 - U.S. Patent 5,393,755, # 10 Exhibit 59 - EP 0579496 A1, # 11 Exhibit…Claim Construction Hearing, # 16 Exhibit 65 - U.S. Patent RE38,115 E, # 17 Exhibit 66 - Mayo Clinic List |
External link to document |
| 2017-02-07 |
198 |
Motion in Limine |
0001-5
2. Pfizer U.S. Patent No. 6,469,012 …Parte Reexamination Certificate for U.S. Patent No. 6,469,012 0053-87
4. Ex Parte…the ‘124 Patent”) nor prior art to the ‘124 Patent in an attempt to
bolster the ‘124 Patent’s disclosure…compare the
‘124 Patent to Lilly’s U.S. Patent No. 6,451,807 (“the ‘807 Patent”) in both its present…Meaning, or Scope of the ‘124 Patent Drawn from
Unrelated Patents. ........................ |
External link to document |
| 2015-11-03 |
38 |
Response in Opposition to Motion |
at 1 (D.N.J. Oct. 11, 2007) (citing U.S. Patent No. 6,455,557). The district
court in that case construed…Lilly and Brookshire infringe U.S.
Patent No. 8,791,124 (“the ʼ124 Patent”) through the sale of Cialis® for…Direct Infringement of the ’124 Patent.
Claim 1 of the ’124 Patent recites, in pertinent part, “… Brookshire for Direct Infringement of the ’124 Patent. .........................................7
…Brookshire for Indirect Infringement of the ’124 Patent. ....................................11
IV. |
External link to document |
