Book a demo

Cut patent&paper research from weeks to hours with PatSnap Eureka AI!

Try now
Supernus Pharmaceuticals v. Ascent Pharmaceuticals et al. | Patent Lawsuit 2:23-cv-05720

Supernus Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. Ascent Pharmaceuticals, Inc. et al.

2:23-cv-05720 E.D.N.Y. Closed 10 patents
Get a prior-art report

Infringement action filed 28 Jul 2023 in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York and closed 30 Oct 2023, with 10 patents asserted. Recorded basis of termination: dismissed without prejudice.

Case recordPatsnap Litigation Data·

Case record

Case no.
2:23-cv-05720
Verdict cause
Infringement action
Court
E.D.N.Y.
Court level
District Court
Case region
New York
Chief judge
None recorded
Trial level
First instance
Filed – Closed
28 Jul 2023 – 30 Oct 2023
Duration
94 days
Basis of termination
Dismissed without Prejudice
Products & marks
Trokendi XR®
Source: Patsnap Litigation Data. Case 2:23-cv-05720, United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York. 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
US8298576B2 Active App. US11/941475

Sustained-release formulations of topiramate

Pharmaceutical compositions of topiramate for once-a-day oral administration are provided. The formulations comprise a sustained-release component and an optional immediate-release component, the compositions of which can be selectively adjusted, respectively, to release the active ingredient along a pre-determined release profile. Method of treating or preventing pathological disorders in mammalian subjects comprising the administration of the novel formulations disclosed herein is also provided.

Read claims and description in Eureka
Patent standing
Legal status
Active
Granted
30 Oct 2012
Earliest priority
17 Nov 2006
Est. expiry
4 Apr 2028
Validity challenges
None recorded
Licences recorded
None recorded
Classification
A61K31/357A61K9/54A61K9/24A61K9/14
Prosecution counsel
FOLEY & LARDNER LLP
Examiner
ZISKA, SUZANNE
US8298576B2 patent drawing, figure 1
Fig. 1
US8298576B2 patent drawing, figure 2
Fig. 2
US9622983B2 Active App. US15/259856

Sustained-release formulations of topiramate

Pharmaceutical compositions of topiramate for once-a-day oral administration are provided. The formulations comprise a sustained-release component and an optional immediate-release component, the compositions of which can be selectively adjusted, respectively, to release the active ingredient along a pre-determined release profile. Method of treating or preventing pathological disorders in mammalian subjects comprising the administration of the novel formulations disclosed herein is also provided.

Read claims and description in Eureka
Patent standing
Legal status
Active
Granted
18 Apr 2017
Earliest priority
17 Nov 2006
Est. expiry
16 Nov 2027
Validity challenges
None recorded
Licences recorded
None recorded
Classification
A61K9/14A61K45/06A61K31/357B82Y5/00A61K31/7048A61K9/16A61K9/50A61K9/24
Prosecution counsel
FOLEY & LARDNER LLP
Examiner
ZISKA, SUZANNE
US9622983B2 patent drawing, figure 1
Fig. 1
US9622983B2 patent drawing, figure 2
Fig. 2
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

“NOTICE of Voluntary Dismissal by Supernus Pharmaceuticals, Inc. without prejudice ( Giove, Nicholas) (Entered: 10/25/2023) 10/30/2023 ORDER. Thecaseis dismissed without prejudice pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 41(a)(1)(A)(i) in light ofPlaintiff’s ECF. No. 10 Notice ofVoluntaryDismissal because Defendants have neither filed anAnswer nora Motion for Summary Judgment. Ordered by Judge NusratJ. Choudhury on 10/30/2023. (ASB) (Entered: 10/30/2023)”

Case 2:23-cv-05720 · E.D.N.Y. · closed 30 October 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 2:23-cv-05720?

2:23-cv-05720 is a patent infringement action brought by Supernus Pharmaceuticals, Inc. against Ascent Pharmaceuticals, Inc., filed on 28 Jul 2023 in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York. The case closed on 30 October 2023.

Which patents were asserted in 2:23-cv-05720?

US8298576B2 (“Sustained-release formulations of topiramate”), assigned to SUPERNUS PHARMACEUTICALS, INC., currently active; US9622983B2 (“Sustained-release formulations of topiramate”), assigned to SUPERNUS PHARMACEUTCALS, INC., currently active; US8663683B2 (“Sustained-release formulations of topiramate”), assigned to SUPERNUS PHARMACEUTICALS, INC.; US8877248B1 (“Sustained-release formulations of topiramate”), assigned to SUPERNUS PHARMACEUTICALS, INC.; US8889191B2 (“Sustained-release formulations of topiramate”), assigned to SUPERNUS PHARMACEUTICALS, INC.; US10314790B2 (“Sustained-release formulations of topiramate”), assigned to SUPERNUS PHARMACEUTICALS, INC.; US8298580B2 (“Sustained-release formulations of topiramate”), assigned to SUPERNUS PHARMACEUTICALS, INC.; US8992989B2 (“Sustained-release formulations of topiramate”), assigned to SUPERNUS PHARMACEUTICALS, INC.; US9555004B2 (“Sustained-release formulations of topiramate”), assigned to SUPERNUS PHARMACEUTICALS, INC.; US9549940B2 (“Sustained-release formulations of topiramate”), assigned to SUPERNUS PHARMACEUTICALS, INC.. The record also lists Trokendi XR®.

How was case 2:23-cv-05720 terminated?

The recorded basis of termination is dismissed without prejudice. The termination text reads: “NOTICE of Voluntary Dismissal by Supernus Pharmaceuticals, Inc. without prejudice ( Giove, Nicholas) (Entered: 10/25/2023) 10/30/2023 ORDER. Thecaseis dismissed without prejudice pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 41(a)(1)(A)(i) in light ofPlaintiff’s ECF. No. 10 Notice ofVoluntaryDismissal because Defendants have neither filed anAnswer nora Motion for Summary Judgment. Ordered by Judge NusratJ. Choudhury on 10/30/2023. (ASB) (Entered: 10/30/2023)”

What does dismissal without prejudice mean?

A dismissal without prejudice ends this action but leaves the claims alive — the plaintiff may file them again later, subject to the limitation period.

How long did case 2:23-cv-05720 take?

94 calendar days, from filing on 28 Jul 2023 to closure on 30 October 2023.

Who were the attorneys and the judge in 2:23-cv-05720?

Nicholas Franks Giove and Richard Kurz are recorded as counsel for plaintiff Supernus Pharmaceuticals.

Answers reproduce fields from the case record for 2:23-cv-05720 and do not constitute legal advice. Ask your own question

Disclaimer. This page reproduces publicly available court docket data for case 2:23-cv-05720 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.

Related Litigation Cases

Help us improve this page

Found incorrect or outdated information? Let us know and we'll get it fixed.