TEVA PHARMACEUTICALS USA, INC. v. SANDOZ, INC.

Nos. 2012-1567, 2012-1568, 2012-1569, 2012-1570.

723 F.3d 1363 (2013)

TEVA PHARMACEUTICALS USA, INC., Teva Pharmaceutical Industries, Ltd., Teva Neuroscience, Inc., and Yeda Research and Development Co., Ltd., Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. SANDOZ, INC., and Momenta Pharmaceuticals Inc., Defendants-Appellants, and Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc., Mylan Inc., and Natco Pharma Ltd., Defendants-Appellants, and Sandoz International Gmbh, and Novartis AG, Defendants.

United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit.

July 26, 2013.


Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Elizabeth J. Holland , Kenyon & Kenyon, LLP, of New York, NY, argued for plaintiffs-appellees. Of counsel on the brief were William G. James, II , of Washington, DC; David M. Hashmall , Goodwin Procter, LLP, of New York, NY; John C. Englander , Henry C. Dinger , Daryl L. Wiesen , John T. Bennett , and Nicholas K. Mitrokostas , of Boston, MA.

Deanne E. Maynard , Morrison & Foerster, LLP, of Washington, DC, argued for defendants-appellants, Sandoz Inc., et al. With her on the brief were Brian R. Matsui , and Marc A. Hearron ; David C. Doyle , Anders T. Aannestad and Brian M. Kramer , of San Diego, CA.

Evan R. Chesler , Cravath Swaine & Moore LLP, of New York, NY, argued for defendants-apellants, Mylan Pharmaceuticals, Inc., et al. On the brief were Shannon M. Bloodworth and Brandon M. White , Perkins Coie, LLP, of Washington, DC; and David L. Anstaett and David E. Jones , of Madison, WI. Of counsel was John Singleton Skilton , Perkins Coie, LLP, of Madison, WI.

Before RADER, Chief Judge, MOORE, Circuit Judge, and BENSON, District Judge.


MOORE, Circuit Judge.

The defendants in these consolidated patent infringement actions (collectively, Appellants) appeal from the district court's judgment that various claims of the nine patents-in-suit asserted by the plaintiffs (collectively, Teva) are infringed, and from the court's holdings regarding indefiniteness, nonenablement, and obviousness.1 We hold that Group I claims are invalid for indefiniteness, but that Group II claims...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases