Novo Nordisk A/S et al. v. Sun Pharmaceutical Industries, Inc. et al.

1:22-cv-00896 D. Del. Closed 19 patents
Get a prior-art report

Infringement action filed 1 Jul 2022 in the United States District Court for the District of Delaware and closed 19 Dec 2023, with 19 patents asserted. Recorded basis of termination: case dismissed.

Case recordPatsnap Litigation Data·

Case record

Case no.
1:22-cv-00896
Verdict cause
Infringement action
Court
D. Del.
Court level
District Court
Case region
Delaware
Chief judge
Colm F. Connolly
Trial level
First instance
Filed – Closed
1 Jul 2022 – 19 Dec 2023
Duration
536 days
Basis of termination
Case Dismissed
Products & marks
Saxenda® (liraglutide recombinant) Solution Injection, 18 mg/3 ml (6 mg/ml)
Source: Patsnap Litigation Data. Case 1:22-cv-00896, United States District Court for the District of Delaware. Open this record in Eureka
Patsnap Eureka

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
10,000 free credits to start
Patent at issue
US8579869B2 Inactive App. US13/370769

Needle mounting system and a method for mounting a needle assembly

A needle mounting system and methods for mounting a needle assembly on a needle mount are disclosed. The needle mounting system includes a needle hub having protrusions extending radially inward. A needle mount has a plurality of slots to receive the protrusions. The slots have a first portion that defines a passageway substantially parallel to a longitudinal axis of the needle mount and a second portion substantially perpendicular to the axis. The needle hub and mount provide a method wherein a needle assembly may be mounted on an injection device without completely rotating the needle hub relative to the needle mount.

Read claims and description in Eureka
Patent standing
Legal status
Inactive
Granted
12 Nov 2013
Earliest priority
1 Aug 2002
Est. expiry
30 Dec 2023
Validity challenges
None recorded
Licences recorded
None recorded
Classification
A61M5/00A61M5/34
Prosecution counsel
NOVO NORDISK INC.
Examiner
SIRMONS, KEVIN
US8579869B2 patent drawing, figure 1
Fig. 1
US8579869B2 patent drawing, figure 2
Fig. 2
US11097063B2 Inactive App. US16/250620

Syringe device with a dose limiting mechanism and an additional safety mechanism

A syringe device for ejecting a dose of a medicament, the syringe device comprising: a dose limiting mechanism arranged to interact with a dose ejecting mechanism to prevent ejection of a dose exceeding a set dose, and a safety mechanism, which is arranged such with respect to the dose ejecting mechanism that, if the dose limiting mechanism fails, the safety mechanism prevents ejection of a dose exceeding the set dose.

Read claims and description in Eureka
Patent standing
Legal status
Inactive
Granted
24 Aug 2021
Earliest priority
27 Jul 2005
Est. expiry
17 Jul 2026
Validity challenges
None recorded
Licences recorded
None recorded
Classification
A61M5/315A61M5/20
Prosecution counsel
NOVO NORDISK INC.
Examiner
CARPENTER, WILLIAM R
US11097063B2 patent drawing, figure 1
Fig. 1

Also asserted in this case

17 more

The docket lists 19 asserted patents. Full bibliographic detail, drawings and prosecution history for the remaining 17 asserted patents are one query away in Eureka.

Source: Patsnap patent data + case record. Bibliographic fields and drawings reproduced from the published patent document. Break down the claims
Parties & counsel

Parties of record

Counsel of record

Source: case record + Patsnap company data. Attorney names appear as recorded in the docket. Compare both portfolios
Outcome

Basis of termination

From the record · verbatim

"STIPULATION AND ORDER OF DISMISSAL of Case No. 22-896 (CFC)"

Case 1:22-cv-00896 · D. Del. · closed 19 December 2023
Source: case record, verbatim. The quoted paragraph is the basis-of-termination text as filed.

Related cases

Three questions this record usually leads to. Each one runs against the full litigation and patent corpus, and cites what it finds.

FAQ

Frequently asked questions

What is case 1:22-cv-00896?

1:22-cv-00896 is a patent infringement action brought by Novo Nordisk A/S against Sun Pharmaceutical Industries, Inc., filed on 1 Jul 2022 in the United States District Court for the District of Delaware. The case closed on 19 December 2023.

Which patents were asserted in 1:22-cv-00896?

US8579869B2 (“Needle mounting system and a method for mounting a needle assembly”), assigned to NOVO NORDISK A/S, currently inactive; US11097063B2 (“Syringe device with a dose limiting mechanism and an additional safety mechanism”), assigned to NOVO NORDISK A/S, currently inactive; USRE46363E1 (“Dial-down mechanism for wind-up pen”), assigned to NOVO NORDISK A/S; US9775953B2 (“Dose mechanism for an injection device for limiting a dose setting corresponding to the amount of medicament left”), assigned to NOVO NORDISK A/S; US11311679B2 (“Automatic injection device with a top release mechanism”), assigned to NOVO NORDISK A/S; US9108002B2 (“Automatic injection device with a top release mechanism”), assigned to NOVO NORDISK A/S; US8114833B2 (“Propylene glycol-containing peptide formulations which are optimal for production and for use in injection devices”), assigned to NOVO NORDISK A/S; US8920383B2 (“Dose mechanism for an injection device for limiting a dose setting corresponding to the amount of medicament left”), assigned to NOVO NORDISK A/S; US9861757B2 (“Injection device with an end of dose feedback mechanism”), assigned to NOVO NORDISK A/S; US9616180B2 (“Automatic injection device with a top release mechanism”), assigned to NOVO NORDISK A/S; US9968659B2 (“Liraglutide in cardiovascular conditions”), assigned to NOVO NORDISK A/S; US7762994B2 (“Needle mounting system and a method for mounting a needle assembly”), assigned to NOVO NORDISK A/S; US9457154B2 (“Injection device with an end of dose feedback mechanism”), assigned to NOVO NORDISK A/S; US10220155B2 (“Syringe device with a dose limiting mechanism and an additional safety mechanism”), assigned to NOVO NORDISK A/S; US10376652B2 (“Automatic injection device with a top release mechanism”), assigned to NOVO NORDISK A/S; US9132239B2 (“Dial-down mechanism for wind-up pen”), assigned to NOVO NORDISK A/S; US9687611B2 (“Injection device with torsion spring and rotatable display”), assigned to NOVO NORDISK A/S; US10357616B2 (“Injection device with an end of dose feedback mechanism”), assigned to NOVO NORDISK A/S; US8684969B2 (“Injection device with torsion spring and rotatable display”), assigned to NOVO NORDISK A/S. The record also lists Saxenda® (liraglutide recombinant) Solution Injection, 18 mg/3 ml (6 mg/ml).

How was case 1:22-cv-00896 terminated?

The recorded basis of termination is case dismissed. The termination text reads: "STIPULATION AND ORDER OF DISMISSAL of Case No. 22-896 (CFC)"

How long did case 1:22-cv-00896 take?

536 calendar days, from filing on 1 Jul 2022 to closure on 19 December 2023.

Who were the attorneys and the judge in 1:22-cv-00896?

Chief Judge Colm F. Connolly presided. Brian P. Egan, Jack B. Blumenfeld and Travis J. Murray are recorded as counsel for plaintiff Novo Nordisk A/S. Anne Shea Gaza, Kimberly A. Beis, Robert M. Vrana and Stephen P. Benson appear for defendant Sun Pharmaceutical Industries.

Answers reproduce fields from the case record for 1:22-cv-00896 and do not constitute legal advice. Ask your own question

Disclaimer. This page reproduces publicly available court docket data for case 1:22-cv-00896 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.