Patent opinions from the Eastern District of Texas and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

E.D. Tex.

Allergan, Inc. v. Sandoz Inc, No. 2:09-cv-00097 (E.D. Tex. Aug. 25, 2011)

Granted in Part
Court
U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Marshall Division
Case No.
No. 2:09-cv-00097, Dkt. No. 261
Decided
August 25, 2011
Judge
T. John Ward, J.
Document
Memorandum Opinion and Order
Docket Entry
MEMORANDUM OPINION and ORDER - the Court GRANTS Defendant's motion for summary judgment that none of the Defendants are seeking FDA approval for the uses claimed in claims 1-3 of the '149 patent and that the uses claimed in claims 1-3 of th…
Length
10 pages

From the Opinion

The passage below is extracted verbatim from the opening of the document. It has not been editorially summarized — consult the full opinion for the court's complete reasoning.

Pending be fore the court is Defendants Sandoz Inc. ‟s (”Sandoz”); Alcon Laboratories, Inc.‟s, Alcon Research Ltd. ‟s, Alcon Research, Inc. ‟s, and Falcon Pharmaceuticals, Ltd. ‟s (“Alcon”); Apotex Inc. ‟s and Apotex Corp. ‟s (“Apotex”); and Watson Laboratories, Inc. ‟s (“Watson”) (collectively, “Defendants ”) motion for summary judgment of non -infringement of claims 1-3 of Allergan Inc.‟s (“Allergan”) U.S. Patent No. 7,030,149 (“the „149 patent”) . (D.I.