Pharma — India Patent Cases
742 decisions indexed
Page 17 of 25 · 742 total
Merck Sharp And Dohme Corp v.Actis Generics Pvt Ltd
The suit involved a dispute over Indian Patent No. 209816, which covers Sitagliptin for diabetes treatment. The parties amicably resolved their disputes through a settlement agreement dated March 15, 2022.
Bristol Myers Squibb Holdings Ireland Unlimited Company v.Angle Bio Pharma
The Plaintiffs filed a suit seeking an injunction against Defendant No.1 for infringing their patented pharmaceutical preparation 'APIXABAN'. The Plaintiffs alleged that Defendant No.1 was advertising and selling the product through various platforms including Indiamart and Tradeindia. The Court granted an ex parte ad interim injunction restraining Angle Bio Pharma from manufacturing or selling APIXABAN without authorization, and directed the intermediary websites to take down the listings.
Micro Labs Limited v.The Controller Of Patents & Anr
The case involves a revocation petition filed by Micro Labs Limited against the patent granted to Bristol-Myers Squibb for a pharmaceutical compound used as an anticoagulant. The court granted an interim injunction restraining Micro Labs from manufacturing and selling the product covered by the patent.
PNB Vesper Life Science Pvt. Ltd v.The Controller General of Patents, Designs & Trademarks
PNB Vesper Life Science Pvt. Ltd challenged the Controller General of Patents' order that deemed its patent application, relating to novel Cholecystokini Receptor Ligands, as abandoned. The petitioner argued that the abandonment was based on procedural failures and clerical errors by agents, not due to lack of interest in the invention. The Madras High Court acknowledged the violation of timelines but emphasized principles of natural justice, ultimately restoring the application for fresh consideration.
Boehringer Ingelheim International GmbH v.Dr. Reddy's Laboratories Limited
Plaintiffs (Boehringer Ingelheim) filed a suit seeking permanent prohibitory injunction against the defendants (Dr. Reddy's Laboratories) for infringing their patent No. 268846, covering Empagliflozin products. The court heard applications concerning the continuation and vacation of an existing ad-interim injunction.
Vifor International Ltd v.Unijules Life Sciences Limited
The dispute involved allegations of infringement regarding Ferric Carboxymaltose protected under Indian Patent No. 221536. The parties referred the matter to mediation, resulting in a Settlement Agreement dated 21.02.2022.
Boehringer Ingelheim International GmbH v.Msn Laboratories Private Limited
The plaintiffs (Boehringer Ingelheim) sought confirmation of an interim injunction restraining the defendants (Msn Laboratories) from infringing their patent (IN 268846) related to Empagliflozin. The court addressed two main issues: the merits of the injunction and whether the defendant could challenge it without a written statement, ultimately allowing the defendant's application for vacation.
Eris Lifesciences Limited v.Controller Of Patents & Anr.
Eris Lifesciences Limited filed a revocation petition challenging Patent No. IN 243301, arguing that it should be revoked because the claims were covered by an earlier genus patent (IN 227719). The Delhi High Court noted that another appeal concerning the same patent was already pending before the court. Consequently, the court directed both parties to serve notices upon each other and listed the matter together with the existing appeal for a hearing on April 6, 2022.
Precise Bio Pharma Pvt Ltd v.Assistant Controller Of Patents And Designs & Anr.
Precise Bio Pharma Pvt Ltd challenged an order by the Assistant Controller of Patents which dismissed a pre-grant opposition against its patent application. The Petitioner argued that the impugned order was not a 'speaking order' and lacked sufficient reasoning. The High Court agreed, setting aside the order and remanding the matter for a reasoned decision.
Boehinder Pharma v.Macleods Pharma
Boehinder Pharma filed an application seeking ad-interim relief to restrain Macleods Pharma from infringing its patent rights over 'Linagliptin'. The applicants argued that their patent was still valid and the respondent was manufacturing and selling the product under brands LINAMAC and LINAONE. The court, finding a prima facie case, granted an interim injunction restraining the respondent from manufacturing or selling Linagliptin.
Merck Sharp And Dohme Corp. v.Beaukev Pharma International Pvt. Ltd.
The plaintiffs filed a suit alleging infringement of their patent (IN 209816) concerning Sitagliptin. The court closed the defendant's right to file a written statement and passed an interim injunction restraining the defendant from manufacturing or selling the patented drug until the final disposal of the suit.
Novartis Ag v.Windlas Biotech Pvt. Ltd.
The cases involve Novartis AG against Windlas Biotech Pvt. Ltd. and Eris Lifesciences Limited regarding commercial disputes. The hearings are scheduled for further directions.
PRECISE BIO PHARMA PVT. LTD. v.ASSISTANT CONTROLLER OF PATENTS AND DESIGNS & ANR.
The petitioner filed a petition seeking a stay against an order passed by the Assistant Controller of Patents and Designs. This order rejected the pre-grant opposition filed by Precise Bio Pharma Pvt. Ltd. regarding Indian Patent Application No. 2471/DELNP/2013 under Section 25(1) of the Patents Act, 1970.
Msn Laboratories Pvt. Ltd v.Novartis Ag
This appeal before the Telangana High Court concerned an infringement suit filed by Novartis Ag against Msn Laboratories Pvt. Ltd regarding patent IN 229051, which covers a specific Valsartan/Sacubitril combination drug. The respondents (Novartis) had secured an interim injunction based on prima facie evidence of infringement due to the appellant's (Msn Labs) manufacturing approval for a similar formulation. The court examined the statutory provisions of the Patents Act and CPC, ultimately dismissing the appeal and upholding the injunction granted in favor of Novartis.
Astrazeneca Ab v.Westcoast Pharmaceutical Works Limited
The plaintiffs, Astrazeneca Ab, filed a suit alleging that the defendant, Westcoast Pharmaceutical Works Limited, was infringing their Indian Patent IN 297581, which covers the anticancer drug Osimertinib (marketed as Tagrisso). The plaintiffs claimed the defendant was soliciting large orders to manufacture and sell the infringing product without authorization.
Astra Zeneca Ab And Anr. v.Natco Pharma Limited
The dispute concerns alleged infringement of Indian Patents IN 205147 and IN 235625 by Natco Pharma Limited regarding the drug Dapnat/Dapagliflozin. The present application sought to release the defendant from a bank guarantee obligation, but the court declined this prayer.
Bristol-Myers Squibb Holdings Ireland v.Metrochem Api Private Limited
The plaintiffs filed a suit for permanent injunction against the defendant for infringing their patent related to the compound APIXABAN. The defendant is accused of manufacturing and selling APIXABAN API without authorization.
Novartis Ag v.Medipol Pharmaceuticals India Pvt Ltd
The plaintiff, Novartis Ag, filed a suit alleging infringement of its patent (IN 233161) concerning the drug Eltrombopag Olamine. The court found a clear prima facie case in favor of the plaintiff, noting that the rights to the patent had been confirmed previously.
Novartis Ag v.Msn Laboratories Pvt Ltd
The plaintiff alleges that the defendant infringed its patent by launching a product containing Eltrombopag Olamine without a license. The court granted an ex parte injunction against the defendant's product 'REBOPAG'.
Chia Tai Tianqing Pharmaceutical Group Co. Ltd. v.The Controller of Patents and Designs and Anr.
The appeal was filed challenging the Assistant Controller's order dated August 24, 2021, which rejected Indian Patent Application No. 201817006495. The appellants argued that the rejection based on multiplicity of inventive concepts violated principles of natural justice as no specific objection was raised in the examination report.
Otsuka Pharmaceutical Co Ltd v.The Controller Of Patents
Otsuka Pharmaceutical Co Ltd filed an appeal challenging the Controller of Patents' order rejecting Indian Patent Application No. 8198/DELNP/2013. The appellant argued that the notice of hearing failed to cite all relevant prior arts ('D2' and 'D3') which were used as grounds for rejection.
Novartis Ag v.Natco Pharma Limited
Novartis sought an interlocutory injunction against Natco Pharma Limited for allegedly infringing its suit patent (IN 233161) covering the drug Eltrombopag Olamine, marketed as REVOLADE. The defendant contested by questioning the patent's validity under Section 64 of the Patents Act. The court found that infringement was established and there was no prima facie case of vulnerability to revocation, thus granting the injunction.
Vifor (International) Ltd v.Alembic Pharmaceuticals Limited
Vifor (International) Ltd filed a suit against Alembic Pharmaceuticals Limited seeking permanent injunction and damages for infringing Vifor's patent. The parties subsequently reached an amicable settlement on August 9, 2021.
Eli Lilly And Company & Ors. v.Bryan Pharmaceuticals Through Its Proprietor Mr. Laxmi Kand Pal / Navneet Kand Pal & Ors.
In this pharmaceutical dispute, Eli Lilly sued several companies for marketing its patented compound Baricitinib under a brand name ('Barinat') for rheumatoid arthritis, allegedly breaching licensing agreements that restricted use solely to COVID-19 treatment. The court addressed an application by one defendant (Defendant No. 11), who claimed the marketing was an inadvertent error and no sales had occurred. After the defendant provided undertakings not to market or sell the drug for any ailment other than COVID-19, the plaintiff agreed that no cause of action survived against this specific defendant, leading to its removal from the suit.
Bristol-Myers Squibb Holdings Ireland Unlimited Company v.Zee Laboratories Limited & Ors.
The plaintiffs filed a suit seeking an ad interim injunction against the defendants for allegedly infringing Indian Patent Nos. 247381, which covers the subject matter related to Apixaban. The court granted the ad interim injunction, restraining the defendants from dealing in or advertising the infringing generic products 'Apixaz' and 'Apiquis', and ordered the permanent delisting of such advertisements.
Chugai Seiyaku Kabushiki Kaisha v.Hetero Labs Limited
Chugai Seiyaku Kabushiki Kaisha filed a suit seeking an ad interim injunction against Hetero Labs Limited for infringing Indian Patent No. IN 294424, which covers Alectinib or its salts/solvates. The court allowed the application subject to exceptions, permitting defendants to use the drug for research purposes under Section 107A of the Patents Act but prohibiting commercial launch without prior court permission.
Sun Pharmaeutical Industries Limited v.Indkus Nexa
Sun Pharmaeutical Industries Limited filed a civil suit against Indkus Nexa and Indo Himalaiyan Herbs Inc. alleging infringement of its registered trademark VOLINI, copyright violation in its packaging art, and passing off due to the use of 'VOLINEX'. The plaintiff sought permanent injunctions and damages. Ultimately, the dispute was resolved through a memorandum of compromise signed by both parties.
Novartis AG v.Natco Pharma Limited
Novartis AG filed a suit alleging infringement of its Indian Patent No. 229051, which covers a pharmaceutical composition combining Valsartan and Sacubitril. The dispute centered on whether Natco Pharma Limited's product, described as a supra molecular complex, infringed the patented combination.
Pfizer Inc & Ors v.Triveni Interchem Private Limited & Ors
The plaintiffs, holding patent IN 218291 for Palbociclib, filed an application seeking interim relief against the defendants who were allegedly manufacturing, marketing, and selling infringing products online. The court found prima facie evidence of infringement and passed several ad interim injunctions restraining the parties from further dealing in the patented product.
Merck Sharp And Dohme Corp & Anr v.Harman Finochem Limited
The plaintiffs filed a suit alleging that the defendant was violating and infringing their registered patent (IN 209816) related to Sitagliptin. Despite previous assurances, the plaintiffs presented evidence showing the defendant continued to advertise and export infringing products. The court granted an ex-parte ad interim injunction restraining the defendant from further infringement.
Dealing with a patent challenge?
Whether it's a Section 3(d) rejection, a post-grant opposition, or a FRAND dispute, Arctic's patent litigation team has handled it. Get a strategy call.