Source: https://www.scribd.com/document/94223803/Cumberland-Pharmaceuticals-v-Mylan-Institutional-et-al
Timestamp: 2017-06-25 19:52:00
Document Index: 385851622

Matched Legal Cases: ['§ 1331', '§ 2201', '§ 1391', '§ 355', '§ 355', '§ 505', '§ 271', '§ 271', '§ 271', '§ 283', '§ 271', '§ 271', '§ 285']

Cumberland Pharmaceuticals v. Mylan Institutional et. al. | Mylan | Patent
Cumberland Pharmaceuticals v. Mylan Institutional et. al.Uploaded by PriorSmartRelated InterestsMylanPatentFood And Drug AdministrationPatent InfringementGeneric DrugRating and Stats0.0 (0)Document ActionsDownloadShare or Embed DocumentEmbedDescription: Official Complaint for Patent Infringement in Civil Action No. 1:12-cv-03846: Cumberland Pharmaceuticals Inc. v. Mylan Institutional LLC et. al. Filed in U.S. District Court for the Northern Distri...View MoreOfficial Complaint for Patent Infringement in Civil Action No. 1:12-cv-03846: Cumberland Pharmaceuticals Inc. v. Mylan Institutional LLC et. al. Filed in U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, no judge yet assigned. See http://news.priorsmart.com/-l68a for more info.Copyright: Public DomainDownload as PDF, TXT or read online from ScribdFlag for inappropriate contentUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISIONCUMBERLAND PHARMACEUTICALS INC., Plaintiff, v. MYLAN INSTITUTIONAL LLC, and MYLAN INC., Defendants.
) ) ) ) C.A. No. ) ) ) ) ) )
COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT Plaintiff, Cumberland Pharmaceuticals Inc. (hereinafter “Cumberland”), brings this Complaint for patent infringement against Mylan Institutional LLC and Mylan Inc. (hereinafter collectively “Mylan”). This action concerns a patent related to Cumberland’s product Acetadote®, an intravenous formulation of N-acetylcysteine (“acetylcysteine”), widely used to treat suspected acetaminophen overdose to prevent or lessen hepatic injury. Parties l. Cumberland is a Tennessee corporation having its corporate offices and
principal place of business at 2525 West End Ave., Suite 950, Nashville, TN 37203. Cumberland is engaged in the business of development, manufacture, and sale of pharmaceutical products. 2. On information and belief Mylan Institutional LLC is a Delaware corporation
having its corporate offices and a place of business at 4901 Hiawatha Drive, Rockford IL 61103. On information and belief, Mylan is engaged in the development, manufacture,
1344088.1
marketing, and distribution of generic pharmaceutical products for sale throughout the United States. 3. On information and belief, Mylan Inc. is the parent company of Mylan Institutional LLC. Mylan Inc. is a Delaware corporation having corporate offices and a principal place of business at 1500 Corporate Drive, Canonsburg PA 15317. Upon information and belief Mylan Inc. is a large and diverse generic drug manufacturing and sales company that distributes and sells its products throughout the United States, including substantial sales in the State of Illinois. Jurisdiction and Venue 4. This is a complaint for patent infringement and for declaratory judgment of
patent infringement. The jurisdiction of this Court is properly founded under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 and 1338(a) as well as 28 U.S.C. §§ 2201 and 2202. 5. 6. 7. Venue in this Court is proper under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1391 and 1400(b). Mylan Institutional LLC resides in this district. Mylan Inc. distributes and sells its products throughout the United States,
including substantial sales in the State of Illinois and the Northern District of Illinois. Mylan Inc.’s wholly owned subsidiary and agent, Mylan Institutional LLC, filed its Abbreviated New Drug Application (“ANDA”) for the infringing product and issued a certification under 21 U.S.C. § 355(j)(2)(B)(ii)—the acts which give rise to the instant litigation—with knowledge that Cumberland would be injured by such actions in Illinois. On information and belief, Mylan Inc. and Mylan Institutional LLC will market and distribute the infringing product if approved by the FDA in this district.
On information and belief, Mylan has maintained continuous and systematic
contacts with Illinois and has purposefully availed itself of the privileges of doing business under the laws of Illinois. Thus, Mylan is subject to personal jurisdiction in this judicial district.
Cumberland is the owner of U.S. Patent No. 8,148,356 (“the ’356 patent”),
entitled “Acetylcysteine Composition and Uses Therefor” (attached as Exhibit A), a valid patent, duly and legally issued on April 3, 2012. 10. A commercial embodiment encompassed by the patent-in-suit is a formulation
of acetylcysteine currently sold by Cumberland pursuant to New Drug Application (“NDA”) No. 021539 under the trademark Acetadote®. Cumberland is the holder of NDA No. 021539 for Acetadote®. 11. Acetadote® is an intravenous formulation of N-acetylcysteine. Acetadote® is
currently used in hospital emergency departments to prevent or lessen potential liver damage resulting from suspected overdose of acetaminophen. Acetaminophen overdose continues to be the leading cause of poisonings reported by hospital emergency rooms in the United States, and Acetadote® has become a standard of care for treating this potentially life-threatening condition. 12. On information and belief, Mylan filed Abbreviated New Drug Application
(“ANDA”) No. 203624 with the United States Food and Drug Administration (“FDA”) seeking approval to market a generic Acetadote® formulation, which contains a certification under 21 U.S.C. § 355(j)(2)(B)(i) and (ii) (“Paragraph IV” Certification) that the ’356 patent is invalid, unenforceable, and/or not infringed.
The Infringing Conduct by Defendants Count I - Patent Infringement of the ’356 Patent 13. 14. Cumberland realleges and incorporates by reference paragraphs 1-12. By submitting its ANDA and Paragraph IV Certification under § 505(j) of the
Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act for the purpose of obtaining approval to engage in the commercial manufacture, use, sale, or importation of its acetylcysteine formulation before the expiration of the ’356 patent, Mylan has infringed one or more claims of the ’356 patent under 35 U.S.C. § 271(e)(2). 15. Mylan has knowledge of the ’356 patent, and Mylan’s actions constitute
knowing and willful infringement of the valid ’356 patent. 16. As a result of Mylan’s infringement of the ’356 patent, Cumberland has
been and will continue to be damaged unless said infringement is enjoined by this Court. Cumberland presently has no adequate remedy of law. Relief Requested Wherefore, Cumberland prays for judgment and relief including: (A) (B) A declaration that United States Patent No. 8,148,356 is valid and enforceable; A declaration that Mylan’s submission of ANDA No. 203624 constitutes an act of infringement of one or more claims of the ’356 patent under § 271(e)(2); (C) A declaration that Mylan will infringe one or more claims of the ’356 patent by importing, using, offering to sell, and selling of its acetylcysteine formulation drug product prior to expiration of the ’356 patent;
A declaration that the effective date of any approval of Mylan’s acetylcysteine formulation drug product is not to be earlier than the expiration of the ’356 patent under 35 U.S.C. § 271(e)(4)(A);
A declaration that Mylan has no legal or equitable defense to Cumberland’s allegations of infringement.
A preliminary and permanent injunction pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 283, enjoining Mylan and its officers, agents, servants, employees, privies, and others acting for, on behalf of, or in concert with any of them from infringing any claims of the ’356 patent under 35 U.S.C. § 271(e)(4)(B).
An accounting and award of damages incurred by Cumberland as a result of Mylan’s infringement if there has been commercial manufacture, use, offer to sell, or sale within the United States or importation into the United States under 35 U.S.C. § 271(e)(4)(C).
An award declaring this case exceptional pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 285 and granting Cumberland its attorneys’ fees in pursuing this case and reasonable costs and expenses incurred in this case; and
Such further and other relief as this Court may deem just and proper.
/s/ Lynn H. Murray Lynn H. Murray Claudia M. Rustad GRIPPO & ELDEN LLC 111 South Wacker Drive Chicago, Illinois 60606 Telephone: (312) 704-7766 Facsimile: (312) 558-1195 Laura P. Masurovsky Mark J. Feldstein Danielle A. Duszczyszyn FINNEGAN, HENDERSON, FARABOW, GARRETT & DUNNER, LLP 901 New York Avenue, N.W. Washington, DC 20001-4413 Telephone (202) 408-4000 Facsimile: (202) 408-4400 ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF CUMBERLAND PHARMACEUTICALS INC.
Recommended DocumentsDocuments Similar To Cumberland Pharmaceuticals v. Mylan Institutional et. al.Skip carouselNoticeBiotechnology Business PlanLilly v HecPharm ComplaintSportBrain Holdings v. Polar ElectroFDA regulations for Drugs Data Carriers LLCOnline News Link v. Strongview SystemsOnline News Link v. DellKoninklijke Philips N.V. et. al. v. Schreder Lighting et. al.Klausner Technologies v. Cloud TelecomputersSunbeam Products v. Hamilton Beach BrandsZiemba v. Incipio Technologiese.Digital v. Creative Labs et. al.Yawman and Erbe Manufacturing Company, a New York Corporation v. Cole Steel Equipment Company, Inc., a New York Corporation, 277 F.2d 876, 2d Cir. (1960)Koninklijke Philips Electronics N.V. et. al. v. Aurora LightingArrivalStar et. al. v. Taca International AirlinesADA Solutions v. Access Products, Inc. d/b/a Access Tile et. al.MyKey Technology v. Robert BotchekParallel Iron v. Bank of AmericaPick Punch v. Equipt4Overture Services, Inc. v. Google Inc. - Document No. 58ComCam International v. Brivo SystemsPowerline Innovations v. Comtrend et. al.Drug ApprovalPatents DigestsresumetemplateHoffmann LaRoche LetterEclipse IP LLCCrossroads Systems v. NetAppSmall Business 3rd Eye Surveillance Files Lawsuit Against Federal Government Seeking $1 Billion in Damages for Video Surveillance Patent InfringementDocuments About MylanSkip carouselInsite Vision et. al. v. Mylan Pharmaceuticals et. al.Short Idea on LannettPfizer et. al. v. Mylan Pharmaceuticals et. al.Report of the UN Secretary-General’s High-Level Panel on human rights and medicinesNovartis Pharmaceuticals et. al. v. Mylan et. al.Alza et. al. v. Mylan Pharmaceuticals et. al.Apotex et. al. v. Mylan PharmaceuticalsSEC Complaint Against Perry CorpAlza et. al. v. Mylan Pharmaceuticals et. al.Report of the UN Secretary-General’s High-Level Panel on human rights and medicinesMylan Pharmaceuticals, Incorporated, a West Virginia Corporation v. American Cyanamid Company, a Maine Corporation, & Third Party v. Stephen McKnight Personal Representative of the Estate of Roy McKnight Third Party Mylan Pharmaceuticals, Incorporated, a West Virginia Corporation v. American Cyanamid Company, a Maine Corporation, & Third Party v. Stephen McKnight Personal Representative of the Estate of Roy McKnight Third Party, 48 F.3d 1216, 3rd Cir. (1995)Santarus et. al. v. Mylan et. al.Mylan Laboratories, Incorporated v. Akzo, N v. and Raj Matkari Ashok Patel Dilip Shah Raju Vegesna Mohammed F. Azeem Charles Chang David J. Brancato Jin-Shung Chang Walter Kletch Jan T. Sturm Pharmaceutical Basics, Incorporated Par Pharmaceuticals, Incorporated Quad Pharmaceuticals, Incorporated American Therapeutics, Incorporated Vitarine Pharmaceuticals, Incorporated American Home Products Corporation Quantum Pharmics, Limited Steven Colton Salvatore J. Pinella, 2 F.3d 56, 4th Cir. (1993)GlaxoSmithKline v. Mylan et. al.Report of the UN Secretary-General’s High-Level Panel on human rights and medicinesAlza v. Mylan Pharmaceuticals et. al.Tibotec et. al. v. Lupin et. al.Santarus et. al. v. Mylan Pharmaceuticals et. al.G.D. Searle et. al. v. Lupin Pharmaceuticals et. al.Shire et. al. v. Mylan Pharmaceuticals et. al.Janssen Products et. al. v. Lupin et. al.Report of the UN Secretary-General’s High-Level Panel on human rights and medicinesAbbott Laboratories et. al. v. Mylan et. al.2016 09 21 Mylan CEO Bresch TestimonyAcorda Therapeutics v. Alkermes Pharma Ireland et. al.AbbVie v. Mylan PharmaceuticalsFerring v. Mylan et. al.Report of the UN Secretary-General’s High-Level Panel on human rights and medicinesCephalon v. Mylan Pharmaceuticals et. al.Novartis Pharmaceuticals et. al. v. Mylan et. al.More From PriorSmartSkip carouselLike kind card game (US patent 6193235)Like kind money board table game (US patent 6186505)Intelligent user interface including a touch sensor device (US patent 8288952)User interface with proximity sensing (US patent 8035623)Wine cellar alarm system (US patent 8710985)Cell regulatory genes, encoded products, and uses related thereto (US patent 7030227)Multicasting method and apparatus (US patent 6434622)Method and apparatus for retrieving data from a network using linked location identifiers (US patent 6226655)Casino bonus game using player strategy (US patent 6645071)High-speed serial linking device with de-emphasis function and the method thereof (US patent 7313187)Casing spacer (US patent 6736166)Advance Products & Systems v. CCI Piping SystemsModern Telecom Systems LLCTracBeam v. AppleRichmond v. Creative IndustriesSenju Pharmaceutical et. al. v. Metrics et. al.VIA Technologies et. al. v. ASUS Computer International et. al.Perrie v. PerrieEckart v. Silberline ManufacturingSenju Pharmaceutical et. al. v. Metrics et. al.Kenzinc v. imblowingup et. al.Sun Zapper v. Devroy et. al.Merck Sharp & Dohme v. Fresenius KabiTracBeam v. T-Mobile et. al.ATEN International v. Uniclass Technology et. al.Mcs Industries v. Hds TradingDok Solution v. FKA Distributung et. al.GRQ Investment Management v. Financial Engines et. al.Merck Sharp & Dohme v. Fresenius KabiMultiplayer Network Innovations v. Konami Digital Entertainment