Eli Lilly and Co. v. Actavis Elizabeth LLC ( 2010 )


Menu:
  • NOTE: This order is n0nprecedentia1.
    United States Court of AppeaIs
    for the Federal Circuit
    ELI LILLY AND COMPANY,
    Plaintiff-AppelZant,
    V.
    ACTAVIS ELIZABETH LLC,
    Defendant-Appellee,
    and
    SUN PHARMACEUTICAL INDUSTRIES LIMITED
    Defendant-Appellee,
    and
    SANDOZ INC.,
    Defendant-Appellee,
    and
    MYLAN PHARMACEUTICALS INC.,
    Defendant-Appellee,
    and
    APOTEX INC.,
    Defen,dant-Appellee,
    and
    ELI LILLY AND COMPANY V. ACTAVIS 2
    AUROBINDO PHARMA LTD.,
    Defendc.'.nt-Appellee,
    and
    TEVA PHARMACEUTICALS USA, INC.,
    Defendant-Appellee.
    2010-1500
    Appeal from the United States District Court for the
    District of NeW Jersey in case no. 07-CV-3770, Judge
    Dennis lVI. Cavanaugh.
    ON MOTION
    PER CUR1AM.
    0 R D E R
    Eli Lilly and Company submits a motion for an in-
    junction to prevent the defendants-appellees from launch-
    ing generic versions of its patented drug, pending
    disposition of its appeal. Eli Lilly also submits a motion
    to expedite the briefing and assignment of this case to an
    oral argument calendar.
    The United States District Court for the District of
    New Jersey held that the defendants induced infringe-
    ment of Eli Lilly's patent. The district court also held
    that the patent was invalid for lack of enablement be-
    cause, inter a1ia, there was no timely demonstration of
    utility. On August 24, 2010, the district court entered
    judgment, and Eli Lilly filed its appeal on August 25,
    2010. The district court granted in part Eli Lilly's motion
    for an injunction to provide Eli Lilly time to seek injunc-
    3 ELl LILLY AND COMPANY V. ACTAVlS
    tive relief from this court. The district court thereby
    temporarily enjoined the defendants for 14 days from the
    date of its entry of judgment.
    Upon consideration thereof
    IT ls ORDERED THAT:
    (1) The response of the defendants-appellees to Eli
    Lilly's motion for an injunction is due no later than noon
    on Monday, August 30, 2010. lt is preferred that the
    defendants-appellees file a joint response.
    (2) The temporary injunction entered by the district
    court is continued, pending this court's receipt of the
    response and this court's consideration of the papers
    submitted.
    (3) The following briefing schedule applies:
    (a) The appellant's opening brief is due within 14
    days of the date of filing of this order.
    (b) The appellees' briefs are due within 14 days of
    service of the appellant's opening brief.
    (c) The appellant's reply brief and the joint appendix
    are due within 7 days of service of the appellees' briefs.
    (d) Oral argument will be scheduled by subsequent
    order of the court.
    (e) All briefs must be served either by electronic mail
    or by hand delivery
    (4) The motion to expedite brieEng and oral argu-
    ment is moot.
    For The Court
    AUG 2 5  lsi Jan Horbaly
    Date J an Horbaly
    Clerk
    "-'-assf§f.l’ss,= '°“
    AUG 26201U
    mm HoaaALY
    CLERK
    ELI LILLY AND COMPANY V. ACTAVlS
    ccc Robert D. Bajefsky, Esq.
    Gregory D. Miller, Esq.
    Scott P. Feder, Esq.
    William A. Rakoczy, Esq.
    Thomas J. Parker, Esq.
    Keith V. Rockey, Esq.
    James F. Hurst, Esq.
    Steven J. Lee, Esq.
    s8
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 2010-1500

Filed Date: 8/26/2010

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 4/18/2021