- Acumen Powered by Robins Kaplan LLP®
- Affirmative Recovery
- American Indian Law and Policy
- Antitrust and Trade Regulation
- Appellate Advocacy and Guidance
- Business Litigation
- Civil Rights and Police Misconduct
- Class Action Litigation
- Commercial/Project Finance and Real Estate
- Corporate Governance and Special Situations
- Corporate Restructuring and Bankruptcy
- Domestic and International Arbitration
- Health Care Litigation
- Insurance and Catastrophic Loss
- Intellectual Property and Technology Litigation
- Mass Tort Attorneys
- Medical Malpractice Attorneys
- Personal Injury Attorneys
- Telecommunications Litigation and Arbitration
- Wealth Planning, Administration, and Disputes
Acumen Powered by Robins Kaplan LLP®
Ediscovery, Applied Science and Economics, and Litigation Support Solutions
-
June 1, 2022Chambers USA Recognizes Five Robins Kaplan Practice Groups And 17 Lawyers In 2022 Guide
-
June 1, 2022Seasoned Attorney Joins Firm’s Business Litigation Group
-
May 26, 2022Shira Shapiro Named Woman of Promise By The Pearl Society
-
June 3, 202219th Annual Advanced Insurance Law
-
June 9, 2022Building Your Brand: Perspectives and Insights from a Diverse Bar
-
June 10, 2022LGBTQ Legal Services: Transgender Name Change Clinic
-
May 24, 2022Briefly: Seeking Fees and Costs While on Appeal
-
May 19, 202211th Circ. Ban On Service Awards May Inhibit Class Actions
-
May 13, 2022Trademark Applications and the Murky Waters of Subject Matter Jurisdiction
-
June 2, 2022Sandberg Stepping Down as Meta COO After 14 Years
-
June 1, 2022Markets Revert to Recent Form as Pessimism Takes Hold
-
May 27, 2022Unexpectedly Strong Retail Sales Pull Markets Back from the Brink
Find additional firm contact information for press inquiries.
Find resources to help navigate legal and business complexities.
ANDA Litigation Settlements
Summer 2013

Case Name |
Drug |
Patent |
Publicly Available Terms |
Sunovion Pharma. Inc. v. Teva Pharma. USA Inc., 09-1302 (D.N.J.) |
Lunesta®(eszopiclone) |
6,319,926 6,444,673 6,864,257 7,381,724 |
All claims and counterclaims are dropped concerning Mylan’s alleged infringement of the patents-in-suit. Mylan will launch one, two, and three mg versions of its generic product in May 2021, two and one-half months prior to the pediatric exclusivity term awarded to the ’673 patent, or earlier under certain unspecified conditions. |
Sunovion Pharma. Inc. v. Teva Pharma. USA Inc., 09-1302 (D.N.J.) |
Lunesta®(eszopiclone) |
6,319,926 6,444,673 6,864,257 7,381,724 |
Sun Pharma agrees not ot manufacture, use, or offer to sell in the U.S. its generic product until April 15, 2014, or an earlier date that may be permitted by the settlement agreement. Sun Pharma admits that its ANDA infringes the patents-in-suit. |
Medicis Pharma. Corp. v. Actavis Mid Atlantic LLC, 11-0409 (D. Del.) Medicis Pharma. Corp. v. Actavis Mid Atlantic LLC, 12-1091 (D. Del.) |
Ziana®(clindamycin phosphate / tretinoin) Zyclara®(imiquimod) |
6,387,383 RE41,134 8,236,816 |
Actavis will be allowed to launch its generic Ziana product in July 2016. Actavis will be allowed to launch its generic Zyclara product in early 2019, or earlier under certain unspecified circumstances. Valeant, Medicis’ owner, will receive a portion of the sales from each of the two generic products. |
AstraZeneca Pharma. LP v. Lupin Ltd., 12-6888 (D.N.J.) |
Seroquel XR®(quetiapine fumarate) |
5,948,437 |
Lupin agrees not to make or sell its generic product before November 2016. Lupin admits that the ’437 patent is enforceable and valid. |
Shire LLC v. Sandoz Inc., 11-1110 (D. Colo.) |
Intuniv®(guanfacine) |
5,854,290 6,287,599 6,811,794 |
Sandoz agreed to license the patents-in-suit and acknowledged that it would be infringing them in the absence of a licensing agreement. |
Shire LLC v. Teva Pharma. USA Inc., 10-0329 (D. Del.) |
Intuniv®(guanfacine) |
6,287,599 6,811,794 |
Actavis and Watson acknowledge that their generic products infringe the patents-in-suit and that those patents are valid and enforceable. Actavis will receive a license to market its generic product beginning December 1, 2013. Actavis shall retain exclusive right to market its product for the first 180 days of that licensing period but will pay Shire a quarter of the profits it earns during the exclusivity period. Watson will receive a license to market its generic product after the expiration of Actavis’ exclusivity period. |
Purdue Pharma LP v. Watson Labs. Inc., 13-0762 (S.D.N.Y.) |
OxyContin®(oxycodone hydrochloride) |
8,309,060 |
Actavis to acknowledge that its generic product infringes Purdue Pharma’s patent. Purdue Pharma to grant Actavis license to market a specified number of bottles of its generic product in 2014, pending approval of Actavis’ ANDA. If Actavis does not receive FDA approval prior to Sept. 1, 2014, it would be allowed to launch a specified amount of the generic product beginning in October 2014. |
Teva Neuroscience Inc. v. Watson Labs. Inc., 10-5078 (D.N.J.) |
Azilect®(rasagiline) |
5,453,466 |
N/A |
In re: Oxycontin Antitrust Litigation, 04-1603 (S.D.N.Y.) |
OxyContin®(oxycodone hydrochloride) |
5,508,042 7,674,799 7,674,800 7,683,072 |
N/A |
Galderma Labs. LP v. Par Pharma., Inc., 12-2563 (N.D. Tex.) |
Epiduo®Gel (adapalene / benzoyl peroxide) |
8,071,644 8,080,537 8,129,362 |
N/A |
Shire LLC v. Teva Pharma. USA Inc., 10-0329 (D. Del.) |
Intuniv®(guanfacine) |
6,287,599 6,811,794 |
Teva was granted a license to market either its own form of Intuniv or authorized generics made by Shire as of 2015. Teva acknowledges that Shire’s patents are valid and, without a license, Teva’s generic product would infringe the patents. |
Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp v. Teva Pharma. USA Inc., 13-1851 (S.D.N.Y.) |
Atripla®(efavirenz / emtricitabine / tenofovir disoproxil fumarate) |
6,639,071 6,939,964 |
N/A |
Altana Pharma AG v. Teva Pharma. USA Inc., 04-2355 (D.N.J.) |
Protonix®(pantoprazole sodium delayed-release tablets) |
4,758,579 |
Teva will pay Pfizer and licensing partner Takeda $1.6 billion. Sun will pay Pfizer and Takeda $550 million. Teva and Sun admit that their generic products infringe the patent-in-suit |
Shire LLC v. Impac Labs., Inc., 10-5467 (N.D. Cal.) |
Intuniv®(guanfacine extended-release tablets) |
5,854,290 6,287,599 6,811,794 |
Shire dropped its infringement claim. Impax agreed to pay licensing fees and not to challenge the validity of Shire’s patents covering Intuniv. |
Hoffman-La Roche Inc. v. Accord Healthcare Inc., 11-3663 (D.N.J.) |
Xeloda®(capecitabine tablets) |
5,472,949 |
N/A |
Related Professionals
Related Publications
Related News
If you are interested in having us represent you, you should call us so we can determine whether the matter is one for which we are willing or able to accept professional responsibility. We will not make this determination by e-mail communication. The telephone numbers and addresses for our offices are listed on this page. We reserve the right to decline any representation. We may be required to decline representation if it would create a conflict of interest with our other clients.
By accepting these terms, you are confirming that you have read and understood this important notice.