United Food & Commercial Workers Local 1776 & Participating Emp'rs Health & Welfare Fund v. Teikoku Pharma United States
District Court, N.D. California
1Opinion of the Court
Unenforceability
Plaintiffs also argue, again relying heavily on Adelman, that Watson was likely to prevail at trial and on appeal because the '529 patent was unenforceable as a result of Teikoku's inequitable conduct. Adelman Report ¶¶ 82-92.16 The inequitable conduct at issue is whether Teikoku and the '529 inventor (Ono) affirmatively misled the PTO by failing to disclose specific "Teikoku Hydrogel" prior art references. Adelman Report ¶¶ 83-88.
Defendants assert that this defense rises and falls to the same extent as the obviousness defense above, as both rely on the Teikoku Hydrogel prior…
2Cases cited61 opinions
- Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1993
- Michael Lacey v. Joseph ArpaioCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2012
- Brown Shoe Co. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1962
- United States v. E. I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1956
- Continental T. v. Inc. v. GTE Sylvania Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1977
56 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by17 opinions
- In re Namenda Direct Purchaser Antitrust Litig.District Court, S.D. Illinois · 2018
- In re EpipenDistrict Court, D. Kansas · 2018
- FRESENIUS KABI USA, LLC v. PAR STERILE PRODUCTS, LLCDistrict Court, D. New Jersey · 2020
- FWK Holdings LLC v. Shire PLC (Direct Purchaser Antitrust Class Action Complaint)District Court, D. Massachusetts · 2020
- Federal Trade Commission v. Surescripts, LLCDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2023
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.