Opinion
2017-2487 2017-2488
08-07-2019
NUVO PHARMACEUTICALS (IRELAND) DESIGNATED ACTIVITY COMPANY, HORIZON MEDICINES LLC, Plaintiffs-Appellees v. DR. REDDY'S LABORATORIES INC., DR. REDDY'S LABORATORIES, LTD., MYLAN, INC., MYLAN PHARMACEUTICALS INC., MYLAN LABORATORIES LIMITED, Defendants LUPIN LTD., LUPIN PHARMACEUTICALS, INC., Defendants-Appellants
JAMES B. MONROE, Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP, Washington, DC, argued for plaintiffs-appellees. Plaintiff-appellee Horizon Medicines LLC also represented by CHARLES COLLINS-CHASE. STEPHEN M. HASH, Baker Botts, LLP, Austin, TX, for plaintiff-appellee Nuvo Pharmaceuticals (Ireland) Designated Activity Company. Also represented by JEFFREY SEAN GRITTON. SAILESH K. PATEL, Schiff Hardin LLP, Chicago, IL, for defendants-appellants.
NOTE: This disposition is nonprecedential. Appeals from the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey in Nos. 3:11-cv-02317-MLC-DEA, 3:11-cv-04275-MLC-DEA, Judge Mary L. Cooper. JAMES B. MONROE, Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP, Washington, DC, argued for plaintiffs-appellees. Plaintiff-appellee Horizon Medicines LLC also represented by CHARLES COLLINS-CHASE. STEPHEN M. HASH, Baker Botts, LLP, Austin, TX, for plaintiff-appellee Nuvo Pharmaceuticals (Ireland) Designated Activity Company. Also represented by JEFFREY SEAN GRITTON. SAILESH K. PATEL, Schiff Hardin LLP, Chicago, IL, for defendants-appellants. Before PROST, Chief Judge, CLEVENGER and WALLACH, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM.
Lupin Ltd. (Appeal No. 2017-2487) and Lupin Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (Appeal No. 2017-2488) appeal from the final judgment of the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey. Horizon Pharma, Inc. v. Lupin Ltd., No. 3:11-cv-04275-MCL-DEA (D.N.J. July 21, 2017) (final judgment). That final judgment sustained the validity of U.S. Patent Nos. 6,926,907 ("the '907 patent") and 8,557,285 ("the '285 patent"), and found the appellants infringed those patents.
The appellants assert that the district court erred in sustaining the validity of the '907 and '285 patents, and consequently erred in the judgment of infringement. The appellants are correct. In Nuvo Pharmaceuticals (Ireland) Designated Activity Company v. Dr. Reddy's Laboratories Inc., 923 F.3d 1368 (Fed. Cir. 2019), this court held that the '907 and '285 patents are invalid for failure to satisfy the written description requirement in 35 U.S.C. § 112(a). The patents asserted against the appellants are invalid. The final judgment of the district court against the appellants is reversed.
REVERSED
COSTS
No costs.