Subscribe to Updates in Legal, Economic & Regulatory Affairs

RSS By Email

RSS By RSS

Add to Google Reader or Homepage

Subscribe in Bloglines


The Expertise Imperative and Compliance Technology
Access to a diverse array of specialized expert inputs drives superior decisions in every organizational context: within corporations, by investors and consultancies, and within nonprofits. When decision makers are confident of their decision inputs, they can respond more quickly and creatively to challenges and opportunities.Learn more about GLG's Compliance Framework


This page may include content provided by Council Members, your access to which is subject to the Terms of Use.
Find Out More

April 16, 2007

JNJ's Definitive TOPAMAX(R) Win Over Mylan Labs

This analysis is solely the work of the author. It has not been edited or endorsed by GLG.
Analysis By:
Patrick Joseph Igoe, Life Sciences Patent AttorneyPatrick Joseph Igoe
Life Sciences Patent Attorney, Independent IP Litigation Consultant
Implications:

If the March 20, 2007 rulings of US District Judge Stanley R. Chester withstand further challenges, then JNJ's TOPAMAX(R) sales will not suffer - at least with respect to Mylan Labs.

 



Analysis:

Judge Chester's rulings are sweeping in scope and represent a definitive victory for JNJ, and, from the other perspective, a complete loss for Mylan. A brief summary of these rulings follow.

With respect to the asserted patent, 4513006: (a) Mylan infringed 9 claims; and (b) the patent is both valid and enforceable.

With respect to regulatory actions: (a) Mylan cannot (until the September 26, 2008 expiration date of 4513006) market generic substitutes for TOPAMAX(R); and (b) the FDA cannot establish an effective approval date for the corresponding ANDA filings of Mylan earlier than the noted September 26, 2008 date.

If this permanent injunction withstands further challenges, then at least with respect to Mylan, JNJ's best-selling TOPAMAX (R) migraine drug will enjoy the full benefits of patent protection of 4513006 until the very last day of that patent's term. This result would be against the noticeable trend - at least in comparison to several recent court opinions of the Federal Circuit - which in effect seems to be tipping the innovator/generic patent battles against the NDA holders and towards the generic ANDA filers.

 



Report a Concern

GLG News: What Experts Think Is Important





Analytics


Generated at 2008-12-02T05:45:17.627