IBJNews

Lilly wins patent lawsuit on J&J Alzheimer’s research

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Eli Lilly and Co. has won a United Kingdon patent lawsuit against a Johnson & Johnson unit over a potential treatment for Alzheimer’s disease.

A patent held by J&J’s Janssen Alzheimer Immunotherapy Research & Development unit isn’t valid, Judge Richard Arnold said in a ruling in London Tuesday. Both companies are developing treatments targeting the build-up of plaque in patients’ brains that’s linked to the condition.

Companies developing the first treatments for Alzheimer’s are competing for what might be a $20 billion market, according to a report last year by Deutsche Bank AG analysts.

“We are disappointed by the outcome of this case, and we are considering our options,” Greg Panico, a U.S. spokesman for Janssen, said in an e-mail.

Lilly is “focused on discovering and developing innovative medicines to meet the needs of patients,” the company said in an e-mailed statement. “This decision by the court supports that effort.”

Lilly stock rose 23 cents Tuesday morning, to $49.29 per share.

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 would not vote for Bayh if he did run. I also wouldn't vote for Pence. My guess is that Bayh does not have the stomach to oppose persons on the far left or far right. Also, outside of capitalizing on his time as U. S. Senator (and his wife's time as a board member to several companies) I don't know if he is willing to fight for anything. If people who claim to be in the middle walk away from fights with the right and left wing, what are we left with? Extremes. It's probably best for Bayh if he does not have the stomach for the fight but the result is no middle ground.

  2. JK - I meant that the results don't ring true. I also questioned the 10-year-old study because so much in the "health care system" has changed since the study was made. Moreover, it was hard to get to any overall conclusion or observation with the article. But....don't be defensive given my comments; I still think you do the best job of any journalist in the area shedding light and insight on important health care issues.

  3. Probably a good idea he doesn't run. I for one do not want someone who lives in VIRGINIA to be the governor. He gave it some thought, but he likes Virginia too much. What a name I cannot say on this site! The way these people think and operate amuses me.

  4. Kent definitely has talent and he may even "win" the afternoon drive time competition, but do we really need 3 local sports talk shows? Can't we get just one show with a national presence?!? I loved Doug Gottlieb in that slot and have now switched back to music. How many times can we talk about Hibbert's implosion or Reggie Wayne's knee?? All these guys know national sports, but it always seem to pull right back to Indiana sports (x3).

  5. is only popular in Maroon COunty

ADVERTISEMENT