Merck loses to Amneal at CAFC in mometasone furoate monohydrate [Nasonex] case

This case, arising on appeal of a decision by Judge Robinson in D. Delaware, is strongly related to a case arising in D. New Jersey, and also appealed to the CAFC [2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 83414; Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp. v. Apotex Inc., 517 F. App’x 939 (Fed. Cir. 2013). ]There is a lot to discuss.For starters, there was an appeal of a discovery ruling. This included the textFollowing two discovery hearings on the issue, thedistrict court became aware of Amneal’s discovery violationand acknowledged that ideally Amneal should haveproduced samples of the Day 4 and A Batches. Thedistrict court determined, however, that it did not haveenough information at the time to determine whether theDay 4 and A Batch samples were materially differentfrom the Day 1 Batch samples. The district court concludedthat it was “not persuaded sitting right here thatmixing [] makes a substantive difference, and if it doesn’t,then it doesn’t matter that Amneal…

Read more detail on Recent Intellectual Property Law posts –

Legal notice about the Merck loses to Amneal at CAFC in mometasone furoate monohydrate [Nasonex] case rubric : Hukuki Net Legal News is not responsible for the privacy statements or other content from Web sites outside of the Hukuki.net site. Please refer the progenitor link to check the legal entity of this resource hereinabove.

Do you need High Quality Legal documents or forms related to Merck loses to Amneal at CAFC in mometasone furoate monohydrate [Nasonex] case?

This entry was posted in Intellectual Property and tagged , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply