Apotex sought a declaratory judgment that it did not infringe a patent owned but disclaimed by Daiichi. The district court dismissed the complaint for lack of a case or controversy, but the Federal Circuit reversed. Because Daiichi’s patent was for a New Drug Application and was listed in the Orange Book, and because Apotex and Mylan (an intervenor in this case) had filed Paragraph IV applications seeking to market generics of Daiichi’s drug, there were significant stakes involved in obtaining a judgment of non-infringement that could affect exclusivity time periods which created a case and controversy sufficient for declaratory judgment jurisdiction.
Apotex Inc. v. Daiichi Sankyo, Inc., Case No. 2014-1282, -1291 (March 31, 2015); Opinion by: Taranto, joined by Mayer and Clevenger; Appealed From: District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, Coleman, J. Read full opinion here.
If you have questions or need more information, please contact firstname.lastname@example.org.