NOTE: This disposition is nonprecedential. United States Court of Appeals
for the Federal Circuit
NUVO PHARMACEUTICALS (IRELAND)
DESIGNATED ACTIVITY COMPANY, HORIZON
MEDICINES LLC,
Plaintiffs-Appellees
v.
DR. REDDY'S LABORATORIES INC., DR. REDDY'S
LABORATORIES, LTD., MYLAN, INC., MYLAN
PHARMACEUTICALS INC., MYLAN
LABORATORIES LIMITED,
Defendants
LUPIN LTD., LUPIN PHARMACEUTICALS, INC.,
Defendants-Appellants
2017-2487, 2017-2488
Appeals from the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey in Nos. 3:11-cv-02317-MLC-DEA, 3:11-cv-04275-MLC-DEA, Judge Mary L. Cooper.
Decided: August 7, 2019
JAMES B. MONROE, Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP, Washington, DC, argued for
22 NUVO PHARMACEUTICALS v. DR. REDDY’S LABORATORIES
plaintiffs-appellees. Plaintiff-appellee Horizon Medicines LLC also represented by CHARLES COLLINS-CHASE. STEPHEN M. HASH, Baker Botts, LLP, Austin, TX, for plaintiff-appellee Nuvo Pharmaceuticals (Ireland) Designated Activity Company. Also represented by JEFFREY SEAN GRITTON.
SAILESH K. PATEL, Schiff Hardin LLP, Chicago, IL, for defendants-appellants.
Before PROST, Chief Judge, CLEVENGER and WALLACH,
Circuit Judges.
Lupin Ltd. (Appeal No. 2017-2487) and Lupin Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (Appeal No. 2017-2488) appeal from the final judgment of the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey. Horizon Pharma, Inc. v. Lupin Ltd., No. 3:11-cv-04275-MCL-DEA (D.N.J. July 21, 2017) (final judgment). That final judgment sustained the validity of U.S. Patent Nos. 6,926,907 (“the ’907 patent”) and 8,557,285 (“the ’285 patent”), and found the appellants infringed those patents.
The appellants assert that the district court erred in sustaining the validity of the ’907 and ’285 patents, and consequently erred in the judgment of infringement. The appellants are correct. In Nuvo Pharmaceuticals (Ireland) Designated Activity Company v. Dr. Reddy’s Laboratories Inc., 923 F.3d 1368 (Fed. Cir. 2019), this court held that the ’907 and ’285 patents are invalid for failure to satisfy the written description requirement in 35 U.S.C. § 112(a). The patents asserted against the appellants are invalid. The final judgment of the district court against the appellants is reversed.
REVERSED
3NUVO PHARMACEUTICALS v. DR. REDDY'S LABORATORIES INC. 3
COSTS
No costs.