Servier Pharmaceuticals, LLC v. Alembic
Infringement action filed 26 Oct 2022 in the United States District Court for the District of Delaware and closed 31 Oct 2023, with 4 patents asserted. Recorded basis of termination: case dismissed.
Case record
- Patents involved
- US10449184B2US10799490B2US9968595B2US10980788B2
- Case no.
- 1:22-cv-01420
- Verdict cause
- Infringement action
- Court
- D. Del.
- Court level
- District Court
- Case region
- Delaware
- Chief judge
- Gregory B. Williams
- Trial level
- First instance
- Filed – Closed
- 26 Oct 2022 – 31 Oct 2023
- Duration
- 370 days
- Basis of termination
- Case Dismissed
- Products & marks
- Pharmaceutical compositions of therapeutically active compounds · Therapy for treating malignancies
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
Pharmaceutical compositions of therapeutically active compounds
Provided are compounds and pharmaceutical compositions useful for treating cancer and methods of treating cancer comprising administering to a subject in need thereof a compound or pharmaceutical composition described herein.
- Legal status
- Active
- Granted
- 22 Oct 2019
- Earliest priority
- 13 Mar 2015
- Est. expiry
- 13 Mar 2035
- Validity challenges
- None recorded
- Licences recorded
- None recorded
- Inventors
- GU, CHONG-HUI
- Classification
- A61K31/444A61K47/38A61K9/10A61K9/14A61K9/20C07D401/14
- Prosecution counsel
- GOODWIN PROCTER LLP
- Examiner
- RAO, SAVITHA M
Pharmaceutical compositions of therapeutically active compounds
Provided are compounds and pharmaceutical compositions useful for treating cancer and methods of treating cancer comprising administering to a subject in need thereof a compound or pharmaceutical composition described herein.
- Legal status
- Active
- Granted
- 13 Oct 2020
- Earliest priority
- 13 Mar 2015
- Est. expiry
- 13 Mar 2035
- Validity challenges
- None recorded
- Licences recorded
- None recorded
- Inventors
- GU, CHONG-HUI
- Classification
- A61K31/444A61K9/14A61K9/10C07D401/14A61K47/38A61K9/20
- Prosecution counsel
- GOODWIN PROCTER LLP
- Examiner
- RAO, SAVITHA M
Also asserted in this case
2 moreThe docket lists 4 asserted patents. Full bibliographic detail, drawings and prosecution history for the remaining 2 asserted patents are one query away in Eureka.
Parties of record
Servier Pharmaceuticals, LLC
- Core tech
- A61K31/444A61K47/38A61K9/10A61K9/14
- Counsel
- Brian P. Egan · Jack B. Blumenfeld · Jeremy A. Tigan
- Firm
- Morris, Nichols, Arsht & Tunnell LLP
Alembic
- Core tech
- Not recorded
- Counsel
- Andrew L. Brown · Bindu Ann George Palapura · David Ellis Moore · Katherine M. Tassmer · Nicholas A. Geiger · Steven M. Coyle
- Firm
- Potter Anderson & Corroon, LLP
Counsel of record
| Attorney | For | Role |
|---|---|---|
| Brian P. Egan | Servier Pharmaceuticals, LLC | Plaintiff |
| Jack B. Blumenfeld | Servier Pharmaceuticals, LLC | Plaintiff |
| Jeremy A. Tigan | Servier Pharmaceuticals, LLC | Plaintiff |
| Andrew L. Brown | Alembic | Defendant |
| Bindu Ann George Palapura | Alembic | Defendant |
| David Ellis Moore | Alembic | Defendant |
| Katherine M. Tassmer | Alembic | Defendant |
| Nicholas A. Geiger | Alembic | Defendant |
| Steven M. Coyle | Alembic | Defendant |
Basis of termination
From the record · verbatim“Plaintiff Servier Pharmaceutical LLC (“Servier”) and Defendant Alembic Pharmaceuticals Limited (“Alembic”), the parties in the above-captioned action, hereby stipulate to the entry of an order and injunction in this action, as follows: IT IS this _________ day of ____________________________, 2023: ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED as follows: 1. This Court has jurisdiction over the subject matter of the above action and has personal jurisdiction over the parties for purposes of this action only, including as set forth below in Paragraph 9 and Paragraph 10 of this Stipulation and Order. 2. As used in this Stipulation and Order, the term “Alembic ANDA Product” shall mean a drug product manufactured, used, offered for sale, sold, or imported pursuant to Abbreviated New Drug Application No. 217768. 3. As used in this Stipulation and Order, the term “Patents-in-Suit” shall mean U.S. Patent Nos. 9,968,595; 10,449,184; 10,799,490; and 10,980,788. 4. As used in this Stipulation and Order, the term “Affiliate” shall mean any entity or person that, directly or indirectly through one or more intermediaries, controls, is controlled by, or is under common control with Alembic; for purposes of this definition, “control” (including the Case 1:22-cv-01420-GBW Document 32 Filed 10/30/23 Page 1 of 4 PageID #: 335 – 2 – terms “controlled by” and “under common control with”) of a business entity means (a) the direct or indirect ownership of more than fifty percent (50%) of the voting stock or other voting interest in such entity; (b) the right to appoint more than fifty percent (50%) of the directors or management of such entity; or (c) the power to otherwise control or direct the decisions of the board of directors or similar body governing the affairs of such entity, provided that such other person shall be deemed an Affiliate of such first person only during the time that such control exists.”
Case 1:22-cv-01420 · D. Del. · closed 31 October 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 1:22-cv-01420?
1:22-cv-01420 is a patent infringement action brought by Servier Pharmaceuticals, LLC against Alembic, filed on 26 Oct 2022 in the United States District Court for the District of Delaware. The case closed on 31 October 2023.
Which patents were asserted in 1:22-cv-01420?
US10449184B2 (“Pharmaceutical compositions of therapeutically active compounds”), assigned to SERVIER PHARMACEUTICALS LLC, currently active; US10799490B2 (“Pharmaceutical compositions of therapeutically active compounds”), assigned to SERVIER PHARMACEUTICALS LLC, currently active; US9968595B2 (“Pharmaceutical compositions of therapeutically active compounds”), assigned to SERVIER PHARMACEUTICALS LLC; US10980788B2 (“Therapy for treating malignancies”), assigned to SERVIER PHARMACEUTICALS LLC. The record also lists Pharmaceutical compositions of therapeutically active compounds and Therapy for treating malignancies.
How was case 1:22-cv-01420 terminated?
The recorded basis of termination is case dismissed. The termination text reads: “Plaintiff Servier Pharmaceutical LLC (“Servier”) and Defendant Alembic Pharmaceuticals Limited (“Alembic”), the parties in the above-captioned action, hereby stipulate to the entry of an order and injunction in this action, as follows: IT IS this _________ day of ____________________________, 2023: ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED as follows: 1. This Court has jurisdiction over the subject matter of the above action and has personal jurisdiction over the parties for purposes of this action only, including as set forth below in Paragraph 9 and Paragraph 10 of this Stipulation and Order. 2. As us
How long did case 1:22-cv-01420 take?
370 calendar days, from filing on 26 Oct 2022 to closure on 31 October 2023.
Who were the attorneys and the judge in 1:22-cv-01420?
Chief Judge Gregory B. Williams presided. Brian P. Egan, Jack B. Blumenfeld and Jeremy A. Tigan are recorded as counsel for plaintiff Servier Pharmaceuticals. Andrew L. Brown, Bindu Ann George Palapura, David Ellis Moore, Katherine M. Tassmer, Nicholas A. Geiger and Steven M. Coyle appear for defendant Alembic.
Disclaimer. This page reproduces publicly available court docket data for case 1:22-cv-01420 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.