Litigation Details for FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION v. ABBVIE INC (E.D. Pa. 2014)
✉ Email this page to a colleague
FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION v. ABBVIE INC (E.D. Pa. 2014)
| Docket | ⤷ Sign Up | Date Filed | 2014-09-08 |
| Court | District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania | Date Terminated | 2021-08-02 |
| Cause | 15:0053 Federal Trade Commission Act | Assigned To | Harvey Bartle III |
| Jury Demand | None | Referred To | |
| Patents | 6,503,894; 8,466,136; 8,466,137; 8,466,138; 8,486,925; 8,729,057; 8,741,881; 8,754,070; 8,759,329; 9,125,816; 9,132,089 | ||
| Link to Docket | External link to docket | ||
Small Molecule Drugs cited in FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION v. ABBVIE INC
The small molecule drug covered by the patents cited in this case is ⤷ Sign Up .
Details for FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION v. ABBVIE INC (E.D. Pa. 2014)
| Date Filed | Document No. | Description | Snippet | Link To Document |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0000-00-00 | External link to document | |||
| 2014-09-08 | 1 | pharmaceutical composition patent relating to AndroGel, U.S. Patent No. 6,503,894 (the “’894 Patent”). To obtain this… this patent, Unimed and Besins were required by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Offlce (“PTO”) to significantly…. Aware of the patent’s narrow scope, Perrigo and Teva designed around the ’894 Patent, developing generic…while prosecuting the ’894 Patent before the PTO in order to obtain the ’894 Patent. Abeie Defendants and …their products infringe the ’894 Patent is without merit. ln the patent litigation, Teva counterclaimed | External link to document | |
| 2015-08-25 | 118 | 7 Besins together hold U.S. Patent No. 6,503,894 (the “‘894 Patent”) for a popular brand-name testosterone…infringe GSK’s patent or that the patent was unenforceable. GSK responded by filing patent infringement…of the patent. The FTC alleges that Abbott, Unimed, and Besins initiated sham patent infringement…up its patent challenge by offering an early entry date for AndroGel, the subject of the patent litigation…the extent it was based on the settlement of the patent litigation. The | External link to document | |
| 2015-12-13 | 145 | Memorandum and/or Opinion | Unimed”) and Besins obtained U.S. Patent No. 6,503,894 (“the ‘894 patent”) for the brand-name testosterone…referenced by name in the ‘894 patent. We do not opine on whether or not the ‘894 patent covers additional penetration…recent meeting with patent examiner and examiner’s decision regarding allowing patent.” The email was…a United States Patent and Trademark Office examiner to Mahoney concerning the patent application. …its patent claims were narrowed to a single penetration enhancer at the time it filed the patent infringement | External link to document |
| 2016-08-25 | 220 | Memorandum and/or Opinion | LLC (“Unimed”) and Besins obtained U.S. Patent Number 6,503,894 has withdrawn claims of privilege in…that the AbbVie defendants and Besins filed sham patent infringement actions against Teva and Perrigo …entered into an anticompetitive settlement of that patent litigation. In January 2003, Unimed …Document 220 Filed 08/25/16 Page 3 of 35 (“the ‘894 patent”) for the brand-name testosterone drug, AndroGel…2011 and October 2011, AbbVie and Besins filed patent infringement lawsuits against Teva and Perrigo | External link to document |
| 2017-09-15 | 300 | Memorandum and/or Opinion | testosterone and is protected by U.S. Patent No. 6,503,894 (“the ‘894 patent”). The FTC further alleges …history record of the ‘894 patent, which issued on January 7, 2003 from U.S. Patent Application Serial No.… 1%. In June 2001, the patent examiner at the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (“PTO”) rejected…surrendered the equivalents for reasons of patentability during the patent prosecution process. See Festo …narrowing the scope of the patent application in order to expedite the patent prosecution process is necessarily | External link to document |
| 2017-12-05 | 319 | Pretrial Memorandum | As patent co-owners, Defendants knew they had secured allowance of U.S. Patent No. 6,503,894 (the …individually, assert a patent infringement claim that U.S. Patent No. 6,503,894 is infringed by…royalty- free license for U.S. Patent Nos. 6,503,894; 8,466,136; 8,466,137; 8,466,138; 8,486,…300 at 23.) After an interview with the patent examiner, patent prosecution counsel, Joseph Mahoney, explicitly…infringe the ’894 patent because it used a different penetration enhancer than the patented composition. | External link to document |
| >Date Filed | >Document No. | >Description | >Snippet | >Link To Document |
