Litigation Details for Fresenius Kabi USA, LLC v. Custopharm, Inc. (D. Colo. 2020)
✉ Email this page to a colleague
Fresenius Kabi USA, LLC v. Custopharm, Inc. (D. Colo. 2020)
| Docket | ⤷ Sign Up | Date Filed | 2020-10-30 |
| Court | District Court, D. Colorado | Date Terminated | 2021-02-19 |
| Cause | 35:271 Patent Infringement | Assigned To | Raymond Paul Moore |
| Jury Demand | None | Referred To | Michael E. Hegarty |
| Parties | FRESENIUS KABI USA, LLC | ||
| Patents | 10,398,669; 9,782,376 | ||
| Attorneys | Katherine Dawson Varholak | ||
| Firms | Sherman & Howard, L.L.C.-Denver | ||
| Link to Docket | External link to docket | ||
Small Molecule Drugs cited in Fresenius Kabi USA, LLC v. Custopharm, Inc.
The small molecule drug covered by the patents cited in this case is ⤷ Sign Up .
Details for Fresenius Kabi USA, LLC v. Custopharm, Inc. (D. Colo. 2020)
| Date Filed | Document No. | Description | Snippet | Link To Document |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0000-00-00 | External link to document | |||
| 2020-10-30 | 1 | expiration of U.S. Patent Nos. 9,782,376 (“the ’376 patent”) and 10,398,669 (“the ’669 patent”) (collectively… INFRINGEMENT OF U.S. PATENT NO. 10,398,669 57. Fresenius Kabi incorporates… the ’376 patent and ’669 patent prior to the expiration of the ’376 patent and ’669 patent; …certification to the patents listed for NDA No. 210632 (specifically, the ’376 patent and ’669 patent) and thereby…376 patent would directly infringe the claims of the ’376 patent. 45. The ’376 patent has | External link to document | |
| >Date Filed | >Document No. | >Description | >Snippet | >Link To Document |
