By Sherri Oslick —

About
Court Report:  Each week we will report briefly on recently filed
biotech and pharma cases, and a few interesting cases will be selected
for periodic monitoring.

Warner Chilcott C. LLC v. Lupin Limited et al.
1:09-cv-00673; filed September 9, 2009 in the
District Court of Delaware

• Plaintiff:  Warner Chilcott Co. LLC
• Defendants:  Lupin Limited; Lupin Pharmaceuticals
Inc.

Infringement of U.S. Patent No. 5,552,394 ("Low
Dose Oral Contraceptives with Less Breakthrough Bleeding and Sustained
Efficacy," issued September 3, 1996) following a Paragraph IV
certification as part of Lupin's filing of an ANDA to manufacture a generic
version of Warner Chilcott's Loestrin® 24 Fe (norethindrone acetate and ethinyl
estradiol tablets, and ferrous fumarate tablets, used for oral
contraception).  View the complaint here.

Warner Chilcott Co. LLC v. Lupin Limited et al.
1:09-cv-00672; filed September 9, 2009 in the
District Court of Delaware

• Plaintiff:  Warner Chilcott Co. LLC
• Defendants:  Lupin Limited; Lupin Pharmaceuticals
Inc.

Infringement of U.S. Patent No. 6,667,050 ("Chewable
Oral Contraceptive," issued December 23, 2003) following a Paragraph IV
certification as part of Lupin's filing of an ANDA to manufacture a generic
version of Warner Chilcott's Femcon Fe® (formerly Ovcon® 35 Fe, norethindrone
and ethinyl estradiol tablets, and ferrous fumarate tablets, used for oral
contraception).  View the complaint here.

Purdue Pharma Products LP et al v. Paddock Laboratories Inc.
1:09-cv-00666; filed September 4, 2009 in the
District Court of Delaware

• Plaintiffs:  Purdue Pharma Products LP; Napp
Pharmaceutical Group Ltd.; Ortho-McNeil-Janssen Pharmaceuticals Inc.
• Defendant:  Paddock Laboratories Inc.

Purdue Pharma Products L.P. et al v. Paddock Laboratories, Inc.
0:09-cv-02411; filed September 4, 2009 in the
District Court of Minnesota

• Plaintiffs:  Purdue Pharma Products LP; Napp
Pharmaceutical Group Ltd.; Ortho-McNeil-Janssen Pharmaceuticals Inc.
• Defendant:  Paddock Laboratories Inc.

The complaints in these cases are substantially
identical.  Infringement of U.S.
Patent Nos. 6,254,887 ("Controlled Release Tramadol," issued July 3,
2001) and 7,074,430 ("Controlled Release Tramadol Tramadol [sic] Formulation,"
issued July 11, 2006) following a Paragraph IV certification as part of Paddock's
filing of an ANDA to manufacture a generic version of plaintiffs' Ultram® ER
(tramadol hydrochloride, used to treat moderate to moderately severe chronic
pain).  View the Delaware compliant here.

Hospira Inc. et al v. Sandoz International GmbH et al.
1:09-cv-00665; filed September 4, 2009 in the
District Court of Delaware

• Plaintiffs:
Hospira Inc.; Orion Corp.
• Defendants:
Sandoz International GmbH; Sandoz Inc.

Hospira, Inc. et al v. Sandoz International GmbH et al.
3:09-cv-04591; filed September 4, 2009 in the
District Court of New Jersey

• Plaintiffs:
Hospira, Inc.; Orion Corp.
• Defendants:
Sandoz International GmbH; Sandoz, Inc.

The complaints in these cases are substantially
identical.  Infringement of U.S.
Patent Nos. 4,910,214 ("Optical Isomer of an Imidazole Derivative
Medetomidine as an Alpha-2-Receptor Agonist," issued March 20, 1990) and
6,716,867 ("Use of Dexmedetomidine for ICU Sedation," issued April 6,
2004), both licensed to Hospira, following a Paragraph IV certification as part
of Sandoz's filing of an ANDA to manufacture a generic version of plaintiffs' Hospira's
Precedex® (dexmedetomidine hydrochloride injection, used for the sedation of
initially intubated and mechanically ventilated patients during treatment in an
intensive care setting).  View the New
Jersey compliant here.  [NB: The
Delaware action was voluntarily dismissed by plaintiffs on September 11, 2009.]