US7601758B1 | Patent Litigation Record

10 cases on record

Cases on record: 10
Asserted by: Takeda Pharmaceutical · Takeda Pharmaceuticals U.S.A.
Asserted against: Alkem Laboratories · Mylan Pharmaceuticals · MylanPharmaceuticals · Zydus Pharmaceuticals (USA) · Dr. Reddy's Laboratories · Macleods Pharmaceuticals · Granules Pharmaceuticals · Hetero Labs · Watson Laboratories
Courts: D. Del. · Fed. Cir. · N.D. W. Va.
Technology: medicinal preparations

Case no.	Parties	Court	Filed	Duration	Outcome
1:20-cv-00325	Takeda Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd. v. Alkem Laboratories, Ltd.	D. Del.	3 Mar 2020	1870 d	Voluntary dismissal
2020-1407	Takeda Pharmaceuticals U.S.A., Inc. v. Mylan Pharmaceuticals, Inc.	Fed. Cir.	28 Jan 2020	185 d	Closed
1:19-cv-02216	Takeda Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd. v. MylanPharmaceuticals Inc.	D. Del.	2 Dec 2019	1963 d	Dismissed with Prejudice
1:18-cv-00464	Takeda Pharmaceuticals U.S.A., Inc. v. Zydus Pharmaceuticals (USA), Inc.	D. Del.	27 Mar 2018	199 d	Voluntary dismissal
1:18-cv-00101	Takeda Pharmaceuticals U.S.A., Inc. v. Dr. Reddy's Laboratories, Ltd.	D. Del.	17 Jan 2018	138 d	Voluntary dismissal
1:17-cv-01469	Takeda Pharmaceuticals U.S.A., Inc. v. Macleods Pharmaceuticals, Ltd.	D. Del.	17 Oct 2017	108 d	Out-of-court Settlement
1:17-cv-01019	Takeda Pharmaceuticals U.S.A., Inc. v. Granules Pharmaceuticals, Inc.	D. Del.	25 Jul 2017	156 d	Likely Settlement
1:17-cv-01020	Takeda Pharmaceuticals U.S.A., Inc. v. Hetero Labs Limited	D. Del.	25 Jul 2017	175 d	Voluntary dismissal
1:16-cv-00202	Takeda Pharmaceuticals U.S.A., Inc. v. Mylan Pharmaceuticals, Inc.	N.D. W. Va.	25 Oct 2016	437 d	Likely Settlement
1:14-cv-00268	Takeda Pharmaceuticals U.S.A., Inc. v. Watson Laboratories, Inc.	D. Del.	27 Feb 2014	732 d	Likely Settlement

Source: Patsnap Litigation Data. Cases asserting US7601758B1 in the current snapshot. Run this in Eureka

About this summary. This page summarises the litigation records within the coverage and snapshot dates stated here. Counts describe records in that dataset and do not, by themselves, establish the conduct, litigation success or legal position of any person or organisation.

Docket data has limits. Records are drawn from a snapshot and may lag the live docket. Sealed filings, amended complaints, counterclaims and post-closure motions may not be reflected. Party names, attorney names and firm affiliations are reproduced as recorded and may contain omissions. Where a field is absent from the record, this page marks it as not recorded rather than inferring a value.

No characterisation of the parties or the outcome. This page reports what the record contains. Nothing here should be read as an assertion that any party infringed, that any patent is valid or invalid, that any settlement occurred, or that any party prevailed. The filing of a claim is not a court finding, and a docket marked “closed” does not by itself establish infringement, validity, settlement or a decision on the merits.

No FTO or validity opinion. Nothing on this page constitutes a freedom-to-operate, novelty, validity or infringement opinion. Any decision touching a live patent dispute should be verified independently and reviewed with qualified patent counsel.

Third-party names and marks. Party, attorney, judge and company names appear for identification only. Company names may be trademarks of their owners; their appearance does not, by itself, imply affiliation with or endorsement by Patsnap.

Corrections and privacy requests. To report an inaccurate record or attribution, use the “Report an incorrect record” link on this page. For requests concerning your personal information, including, where applicable, the rights to access, rectify, erase, restrict or object to processing, use the “Privacy request” link. We assess requests under applicable law. See our Privacy Policy for details of this processing.

US7601758B1 Patent litigation record

10 cases on record

How strong is US7601758B1?