By Memorandum Opinion entered in Allergan USA, Inc. et al. v. Aurobindo Pharma Ltd., et al., Civil Action No. 19-1727-RGA (D.Del. January 11, 2021), The Honorable Richard G. Andrews construed the five (5) remaining terms in dispute in the six (6) patents-in-suit, U.S. Patent Nos. 8,691,860 (“the ‘860 patent”), 9,115,091 (“the ‘091 patent”), 9,364,489 (“the

By Memorandum Order entered by The Honorable Colm F. Connolly, in Amgen Inc. et al. v. Hospira, Inc. et al., Civil Action No. 20-0561-CFC (D.Del. January 7, 2021), the Court granted in part the motion of Defendants Hospira, Inc. and Pfizer, Inc. to stay Civil Action No. 20-0561 until 14 days after resolution of

By Memorandum Opinion entered by The Honorable Colm F. Connolly in ChromaDex, Inc. et al. v. Elysium Health, Inc., Civil Action No. 18-1434-CFC-JLH (D.Del. December 17, 2020), the Court granted in part and denied in part Defendant Elysium Health’s Rule 12(b)(1) motion to dismiss Plaintiff ChromaDex’s patent infringement claims after finding that (1) ChromaDex

By Memorandum Order entered by The Honorable Colm F. Connolly in Pharmacyclics LLC et al. v. Cipla Limited, et al., Civil Action No. 18-192-CFC/CJB (D.Del. November 10, 2020) (Consolidated), the Court granted Plaintiffs’ request to preclude Defendant Sandoz from maintaining its theory that U.S. Patent No. 10,106,548 (“the ‘548 patent”) is invalid

By Memorandum Opinion entered by The Honorable Maryellen Noreika in Mixing & Mass Transfer Technologies, LLC v. SPX Corporation et al., Civil Action No. 19-529-MN (D.Del. November 4, 2020), the Court denied the SPX Defendants’ motion for attorneys’ fees after finding that Defendants were not a prevailing party.

By way of background, between 2005

By Memorandum Opinion entered by The Honorable Leonard P. Stark in Osseo Imaging, LLC v. Planmeca USA Inc., Civil Action No. 17-1386-LPS (D.Del. October 28, 2020), the Court, inter alia, denied Defendant’s motion for summary judgment of no infringement with respect to literal infringement and granted Defendant’s motion for summary judgment of no

By Memorandum Order entered by The Honorable Richard G. Andrews in Ingevity Corp. et al. v. BASF Corp., Civil Action No. 18-1391-RGA (D.Del. October 21, 2020), the Court denied Plaintiff Ingevity’s motion to exclude all or portions of the testimony of two experts of Defendant BASF on the basis of Daubert without prejudice to