IBJNews

Lilly loses patent dispute over Alimta in London court

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Eli Lilly and Co. lost a United Kingdom lawsuit over its Alimta cancer treatment when a judge ruled Thursday that a generic version planned by Actavis Plc doesn’t breach European patents.

Judge Richard Arnold in London rejected Lilly’s argument that Actavis’ planned pemetrexed disodium product infringed patents registered in the United Kingdom, France, Italy and Spain. Lilly said it would appeal the ruling, part of which relates to the use of vitamins.

Indianapolis-based Lilly, which had first quarter sales of $632 million from Alimta this year, has fought lawsuits across the globe to protect patents related to the product. In March, a U.S. District Court upheld a patent regarding vitamin dosage in a dispute with Teva Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd.

“The significant scientific research that Lilly performed in support of those vitamin dosage regimen patents deserves intellectual property protection,” Michael J. Harrington, Lilly’s general counsel, said in an e-mailed statement. “We plan to seek permission to appeal this ruling.”

Some European patents for Alimta expire in December 2015, and Actavis is seeking regulatory approval for a rival treatment, according to a written decision by Judge Arnold handed down in London.

Lilly said in its statement that it had won an Alimta patent case in Germany earlier this year. The company said it expected European patents related to vitamin dosage to remain in force until 2021.

Actavis said the ruling was the first time an English High Court had ruled in a case involving foreign designations of a European patent.

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 am so impressed that the smoking ban FAILED in Kokomo! I might just move to your Awesome city!

  2. way to much breweries being built in indianapolis. its going to be saturated market, if not already. when is enough, enough??

  3. This house is a reminder of Hamilton County history. Its position near the interstate is significant to remember what Hamilton County was before the SUPERBROKERs, Navients, commercial parks, sprawling vinyl villages, and acres of concrete retail showed up. What's truly Wasteful is not reusing a structure that could still be useful. History isn't confined to parks and books.

  4. To compare Connor Prairie or the Zoo to a random old house is a big ridiculous. If it were any where near the level of significance there wouldn't be a major funding gap. Put a big billboard on I-69 funded by the tourism board for people to come visit this old house, and I doubt there would be any takers, since other than age there is no significance whatsoever. Clearly the tax payers of Fishers don't have a significant interest in this project, so PLEASE DON'T USE OUR VALUABLE MONEY. Government money is finite and needs to be utilized for the most efficient and productive purposes. This is far from that.

  5. I only tried it 2x and didn't think much of it both times. With the new apts plus a couple other of new developments on Guilford, I am surprised it didn't get more business. Plus you have a couple of subdivisions across the street from it. I hope Upland can keep it going. Good beer and food plus a neat environment and outdoor seating.

ADVERTISEMENT