Novo Nordisk, Inc. et al. v. Lupin, Ltd.
Infringement action filed 27 Jul 2023 in the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey and closed 14 Aug 2023, with 2 patents asserted. Recorded basis of termination: case transferred.
Case record
- Patents involved
- US9265893B2US8114833B2
- Case no.
- 3:23-cv-04027
- Verdict cause
- Infringement action
- Court
- D.N.J.
- Court level
- District Court
- Case region
- New Jersey
- Chief judge
- Georgette Castner
- Trial level
- First instance
- Filed – Closed
- 27 Jul 2023 – 14 Aug 2023
- Duration
- 18 days
- Basis of termination
- Case Transferred
- Products & marks
- Liraglutide injection solution, 18 mg/3 ml (6 mg/ml) · VICTOZA®
Check this patent against your own product
Prior art, claim scope, infringement exposure and design-around routes. Every answer cites the records behind it.
Get an FTO claim chart- 01Ranked prior artEvery hit source-linked
- 02Claim-level comparisonAgainst your own product
- 03Legal statusAcross 174 jurisdictions
Injection button
A push button connection for an injection device comprising a push button (10) and a driving part (20). The two parts of the push button connection are mounted to each other and is relatively rotatable to each other. In order to minimize the friction occurring between the push button and the driving part when relatively rotated forces are transmitted via a pivot bearing (18, 22). In order also to minimize the effect of forces appearing dislocated from the center line a number of radial bearings (13, 23; 14, 25) having a little friction diameter is provided.
- Legal status
- Active
- Granted
- 23 Feb 2016
- Earliest priority
- 5 Feb 2007
- Est. expiry
- 23 Mar 2033
- Validity challenges
- None recorded
- Licences recorded
- None recorded
- Inventors
- HANSEN, TORBEN STROEM · WIELANDT, JAKOB OEST · GROTH, LARS MOERCH
- Classification
- A61M5/00A61M5/315
- Prosecution counsel
- NOVO NORDISK INC.
- Examiner
- GRAY, PHILLIP
Propylene glycol-containing peptide formulations which are optimal for production and for use in injection devices
The present invention relates to pharmaceutical formulations comprising a peptide and propylene glycol, to methods of preparing such formulations, and to uses of such formulations in the treatment of diseases and conditions for which use of the peptide contained in such formulations is indicated. The present invention further relates to methods for reducing the clogging of injection devices by a peptide formulation and for reducing deposits on production equipment during production of a peptide formulation.
- Legal status
- Inactive
- Granted
- 14 Feb 2012
- Earliest priority
- 20 Nov 2003
- Est. expiry
- 13 Feb 2026
- Validity challenges
- 3 on recordIPR2022-00657 · Other · filed by Fresenius Kabi USA, LLCIPR2020-00324 · filed by Mylan Institutional LLCIPR2020-01252 · Other · filed by Pfizer Inc.
- Licences recorded
- None recorded
- Inventors
- PEDERSEN, TINA BJELDSKOV · BONDE, CLAUDE · ENGELUND, DORTHE KOT
- Classification
- A61K38/26A61K38/28A61K47/10A61K47/18A61K47/20A61K47/26
- Prosecution counsel
- NOVO NORDISK INC.
- Examiner
- BRADLEY, CHRISTINA
Parties of record
Novo Nordisk, Inc.
- Core tech
- A61M5/00A61M5/315A61K38/26A61K38/28
- Counsel
- David Feder
- Firm
- Fenwick & West, LLP
- Also named
- Novo Nordisk A/S
Lupin, Ltd.
- Core tech
- Not recorded
- Counsel
- Not recorded
- Firm
- Not recorded
Counsel of record
| Attorney | For | Role |
|---|---|---|
| David Feder | Novo Nordisk, Inc. | Plaintiff |
Basis of termination
From the record · verbatim“Case transferred to NEWARK Division on 8/14/2023. New Case Number 2:23-cv-4027. (jjc, )”
Case 3:23-cv-04027 · D.N.J. · closed 14 August 2023
Related cases
Three questions this record usually leads to. Each one runs against the full litigation and patent corpus, and cites what it finds.
Frequently asked questions
What is case 3:23-cv-04027?
3:23-cv-04027 is a patent infringement action brought by Novo Nordisk, Inc. against Lupin, Ltd., filed on 27 Jul 2023 in the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey. The case closed on 14 August 2023.
Which patents were asserted in 3:23-cv-04027?
US9265893B2 (“Injection button”), assigned to NOVO NORDISK A/S, currently active; US8114833B2 (“Propylene glycol-containing peptide formulations which are optimal for production and for use in injection devices”), assigned to NOVO NORDISK A/S, currently inactive. The record also lists Liraglutide injection solution, 18 mg/3 ml (6 mg/ml) and VICTOZA®.
How was case 3:23-cv-04027 terminated?
The recorded basis of termination is case transferred. The termination text reads: “Case transferred to NEWARK Division on 8/14/2023. New Case Number 2:23-cv-4027. (jjc, )”
What does transfer mean?
A transfer moves the case to another district rather than deciding it. The action continues there under a new case number.
How long did case 3:23-cv-04027 take?
18 calendar days, from filing on 27 Jul 2023 to closure on 14 August 2023.
Who were the attorneys and the judge in 3:23-cv-04027?
Chief Judge Georgette Castner presided. David Feder is recorded as counsel for plaintiff Novo Nordisk.
Disclaimer. This page reproduces publicly available court docket data for case 3:23-cv-04027 and is provided for general information and reference only. It is not legal advice and must not be relied upon as such.
Docket data has limits. Records are drawn from a snapshot and may lag the live docket. Sealed filings, amended complaints, counterclaims and post-closure motions may not be reflected. Party names, attorney names and firm affiliations are reproduced as recorded and may contain omissions. Where a field is absent from the record, this page marks it as not recorded rather than inferring a value.
No characterisation of the parties or the outcome. This page reports what the record contains. Nothing here should be read as an assertion that any party infringed, that any patent is valid or invalid, that any settlement occurred, or that any party prevailed.
No FTO or validity opinion. Nothing on this page constitutes a freedom-to-operate, novelty, validity or infringement opinion. Any decision touching a live patent dispute should be verified independently and reviewed with qualified patent counsel.