IBJNews

Lilly loses bid to end revived Zyprexa U.K. patent case

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Eli Lilly and Co., whose best-selling schizophrenia drug Zyprexa survived a United Kingdom court challenge by generic makers two years ago, lost a bid to dismiss another lawsuit over the medicine’s patent in Britain.

Judge Christopher Floyd in the High Court in London on Tuesday denied Lilly’s request for a judgment without trial against Neopharma Ltd., the closely held company that has European marketing rights for the generic version of the drug known chemically as olanzapine. One of Neopharma’s three claims in the case was dismissed.

While Floyd agreed Neopharma should be allowed to introduce “fresh evidence” in the dispute, he said the company was unlikely to succeed and ordered it to post a $321,400 security to pay Lilly’s legal fees if it loses.

The disputed patent held by Indianapolis-based Lilly was upheld by the U.K. Court of Appeal in December 2009, against a challenge by the Indian generic-drug maker Dr. Reddy’s Laboratories Ltd. The drug survived a parallel U.S. challenge in 2006 and went on to generate worldwide sales last year of more than $5 billion.

“This decision granting summary judgment for part of the case and security for costs for the remainder of the case in these circumstances, is unprecedented,” said Mark Sudwell, a U.K.-based spokesman for Eli Lilly. The ruling “confirms Lilly’s confidence in the strength of the olanzapine patent.”

Neopharma, which currently has no operations, briefly sold its generic version of the drug in Britain in 2008, before a court injunction forced it to stop. The case was put on hold until the Dr. Reddy’s lawsuit was resolved.

Neopharma’s lawyer, Antony Watson, argued the case should go to trial because he will introduce claims against the patent that haven’t yet been addressed in the U.K. Lilly claims those arguments were rejected by courts in the Czech Republic, Slovakia, Canada and the U.S. and needn’t be heard.



 

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
 
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. I took Bruce's comments to highlight a glaring issue when it comes to a state's image, and therefore its overall branding. An example is Michigan vs. Indiana. Michigan has done an excellent job of following through on its branding strategy around "Pure Michigan", even down to the detail of the rest stops. Since a state's branding is often targeted to visitors, it makes sense that rest stops, being that point of first impression, should be significant. It is clear that Indiana doesn't care as much about the impression it gives visitors even though our branding as the Crossroads of America does place importance on travel. Bruce's point is quite logical and accurate.

  2. I appreciated the article. I guess I have become so accustomed to making my "pit stops" at places where I can ALSO get gasoline and something hot to eat, that I hardly even notice public rest stops anymore. That said, I do concur with the rationale that our rest stops (if we are to have them at all) can and should be both fiscally-responsible AND designed to make a positive impression about our state.

  3. I don't know about the rest of you but I only stop at these places for one reason, and it's not to picnic. I move trucks for dealers and have been to rest areas in most all 48 lower states. Some of ours need upgrading no doubt. Many states rest areas are much worse than ours. In the rest area on I-70 just past Richmond truckers have to hike about a quarter of a mile. When I stop I;m generally in a bit of a hurry. Convenience,not beauty, is a primary concern.

  4. Community Hospital is the only system to not have layoffs? That is not true. Because I was one of the people who was laid off from East. And all of the LPN's have been laid off. Just because their layoffs were not announced or done all together does not mean people did not lose their jobs. They cherry-picked people from departments one by one. But you add them all up and it's several hundred. And East has had a dramatic drop I in patient beds from 800 to around 125. I know because I worked there for 30 years.

  5. I have obtained my 6 gallon badge for my donation of A Positive blood. I'm sorry to hear that my donation was nothing but a profit center for the Indiana Blood Center.

ADVERTISEMENT