Welcome to Scribd. Sign in or start your free trial to enjoy unlimited e-books, audiobooks & documents.Find out more
Download
Standard view
Full view
of .
Look up keyword
Like this
0Activity
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
Lilly v Par Complaint

Lilly v Par Complaint

Ratings: (0)|Views: 242|Likes:
Published by pauloverhauser
complaint
complaint

More info:

Categories:Types, Brochures
Published by: pauloverhauser on Jan 27, 2014
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial

Availability:

Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less

04/16/2014

pdf

text

original

 
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURTSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANAINDIANAPOLIS DIVISION_______________________________________ELI LILLY AND COMPANY,DAIICHI SANKYOCO.,LTD.,DAIICHISANKYO, INC.,and UBE INDUSTRIES,LTD.,Plaintiffs,v.PAR PHARMACEUTICAL COMPANIES,INC., andPAR PHARMACEUTICAL, INC.,Defendants.)))))))))))))))C.A. NO.1:14-cv-109-__________
_______________________________________
)COMPLAINTFOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT
Eli Lilly and Company;Daiichi SankyoCo.,Ltd.;Daiichi Sankyo, Inc.;and UbeIndustries,Ltd.
(“Plaintiffs”) for their 
Complaintagainst DefendantsPar PharmaceuticalCompanies, Inc.and
Par Pharmaceutical, Inc. (collectively “Pa
rPharmaceutical
”), hereby allege
as follows:
THE PARTIES
1.Plaintiff Eli Lilly and
Company (“Lilly”) is a corporation organized and existing under 
the laws of the State of Indiana and has a principal place of business atLilly Corporate Center,Indianapolis, Indiana 46285.2.Plaintiff Daiichi SankyoCo., Ltd.
(“Daiichi Sankyo”) is a corporation organized and
existing under the laws of Japanand has a principal place of business at3-5-1, Nihonbashi-honcho, Chuo-ku, Tokyo 103-8426, Japan.
Case 1:14-cv-00109-SEB-TAB Document 1 Filed 01/23/14 Page 1 of 12 PageID #: 1
 
 
-2-3.
Plaintiff Daiichi Sankyo, Inc. (“
DSI
”) is a corporation organized and existing under the
laws of the State of Delaware and has a principal place of business at Two Hilton Court,Parsippany, New Jersey 07054.4.DSI is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Daiichi Sankyo U.S. Holdings, Inc., whichis acorporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Delaware and has a principalplace of business at Two Hilton Court, Parsippany, New Jersey 07054.5.Daiichi Sankyo U.S. Holdings, Inc. is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Daiichi Sankyo.6.
Plaintiff Ube Industries, Ltd. (“Ube”) is a corporation organized and existing under the
laws of Japan, and has a principal place of business at 1978-96, Kogushi, Ube,Yamaguchi 755-8633, Japan.7.
Defendant Par Pharmaceutical Companies, Inc. (“Par Pharmaceutical Companies”) is a
corporation organized and existing under the lawsof Delawareand has a principal place of business at 300 Tice Boulevard, Woodcliff Lake, New Jersey 07677.8.D
efendant Par Pharmaceutical, Inc. (“Par”) is a corporation organized and exis
ting underthe laws of Delawareand has a principal place of business at 300 Tice Boulevard, Woodcliff Lake, New Jersey 07677.9.Par is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Par Pharmaceutical Companies.10.Par Pharmaceutical Companies operates primarily through itswholly-owned subsidiaryPar.11.The acts of Par complained of herein were done with the cooperation, participation,andassistance of Par Pharmaceutical Companies.
Case 1:14-cv-00109-SEB-TAB Document 1 Filed 01/23/14 Page 2 of 12 PageID #: 2
 
-3-
NATURE OF THE ACTION
12.This is a civil action for patent infringement under the Patent Laws of the United States,35 U.S.C. §100
et seq.
, arising out of the filing by Defendant Par of an Abbreviated New Drug
Application (“ANDA”) with the United States Food and Drug Administration (“FDA”) seeking
approval to manufacture and sell generic versionsof 
Lilly’s
pharmaceutical products, Effient®5mg and 10mgtablets,prior to the expiration of 
Daiichi Sankyo’s
and
Ube’s
United StatesPatentNos. 8,404,703 and 8,569,325, which cover methods of using Effient®productsand areexclusivelylicensed to Lilly.
JURISDICTION AND VENUE
13.This Court has jurisdiction over the subject matter of this action, which arises under thepatent laws of the United States, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§1331,1338(a), 2201, and 2202.14.
This Court has personal jurisdiction over Par because of Par’s continuous and systematic
contacts withthisState.Par (1) intentionally markets and provides its generic pharmaceuticaldrug products to residents of this State,(2) maintains a broad distributorship network within thisState,and (3) enjoys substantial income from salesofits generic pharmaceutical productsin thisState.15.This Court has personal jurisdiction over Par PharmaceuticalCompanies becauseParPharmaceutical Companiesis(1)the parent company ofPar, (2) operates primarily through itswholly owned subsidiary Par,and (3)shares common headquarters and officers and directorswithPar.16.Venue is proper in this judicial district pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§1391 and 1400(b).
Case 1:14-cv-00109-SEB-TAB Document 1 Filed 01/23/14 Page 3 of 12 PageID #: 3

You're Reading a Free Preview

Download
scribd
/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->