Litigation Details for Hospira, Inc. v. Fresenius Kabi USA, LLC (N.D. Ill. 2016)
✉ Email this page to a colleague
Hospira, Inc. v. Fresenius Kabi USA, LLC (N.D. Ill. 2016)
| Docket | ⤷ Sign Up | Date Filed | 2016-01-15 |
| Court | District Court, N.D. Illinois | Date Terminated | 2018-12-17 |
| Cause | 35:271 Patent Infringement | Assigned To | |
| Jury Demand | None | Referred To | |
| Parties | HOSPIRA, INC. | ||
| Patents | 6,716,867; 8,242,158; 8,338,470; 8,455,527; 8,648,106; 9,320,712; 9,616,049 | ||
| Attorneys | Gina M Bassi | ||
| Firms | Chad J. Ray | ||
| Link to Docket | External link to docket | ||
Small Molecule Drugs cited in Hospira, Inc. v. Fresenius Kabi USA, LLC
The small molecule drug covered by the patents cited in this case is ⤷ Sign Up .
Details for Hospira, Inc. v. Fresenius Kabi USA, LLC (N.D. Ill. 2016)
| Date Filed | Document No. | Description | Snippet | Link To Document |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0000-00-00 | External link to document | |||
| 2016-01-14 | 1 | infringement of U.S. Patent Nos. 8,242,158 (the “‘158 patent”) (Ex. A); 8,338,470 (the “‘470 patent”) (Ex. B); … COUNT I FOR INFRINGEMENT OF PATENT NO. 8,242,158 22. Paragraphs 1 through… claims of the ‘158 patent, the ‘470 patent, the ‘527 patent, and the ‘106 patent are invalid and/or … “‘527 patent”) (Ex. C); and 8,648,106 (the “‘106 patent”) (Ex. D) (collectively, the “Patents-in-suit… THE PATENTS-IN-SUIT 9. The ‘158 patent, entitled “Dexmedetomidine | External link to document | |
| 2018-12-16 | 176 | Order on Motion for Leave to File | obtained four patents covering a new product made from dexmedetomidine: U.S. Patent Nos. 8,242,158 (the “’158…’158 Patent”), 8,338,470 (the “’470 Patent”), 8,455,527 (the “’527 Patent”), and 8,648,106 (the “’106…product—U.S. Patent No. 9,616,049 (the “’049 Patent”)—and filed a second complaint of patent infringement…obtained a patent that disclosed and claimed the compound: U.S. Patent No. 4,910,214 (the “’214 Patent”), JTX…named co- inventors of the patents-in-suit. (See ’106 Patent, JTX 1; ’049 Patent, JTX 2.) Dr. Roychowdhury | External link to document |
| 2017-11-26 | 69 | . No. 6,716,867.” (‘527 Patent, JA-34, col. 10 ll. 33–35.) The patent referenced, No. 6,716,867, is the…The claim terms in the '158 Patent, '470 Patent, '527 Patent, and '106 Patent are construed as stated in…The claim terms in the ‘158 Patent, ‘470 Patent, ‘527 Patent, and ‘106 Patent are construed as follows:…8,242,158 (the “ ‘158 Patent”), 8,338,470 (the “ ‘470 Patent”), 8,455,527 (the “ ‘527 Patent”), and 8,648,106…106 Patent, JA-43.) The Patent Office issued the patents between August 14, 2012, and February 11, 2014 | External link to document | |
| 2017-12-03 | 72 | infringing U.S. Patent Nos. 8,242,158 (the“’158 patent”); 8,338,470 (the “’470 patent”); 8,455,527 (the… U.S. Patent No. 9,616,049 (“the ’049 patent”). Like the patents in Hospira I, the ’049 patent claims…the “’527 patent”); and 8,648,106 (the “’106 patent”) (collectively, “Hospira I Patents”). The ’158, …asserting that the ’049 patent and U.S. Patent No. 9,320,712 (“the ’712 patent”) were invalid and not …family as the ’049 patent and the Hospira I patents. The ’712 patent also shares the same specification | External link to document | |
| >Date Filed | >Document No. | >Description | >Snippet | >Link To Document |
