7947724

Consolidated Hatch-Waxman ANDA action in D.N.J. (lead case 3:11-cv-03962, consolidated with 3:11-cv-05579 and 3:13-cv-05815) asserting the '724, '725, '424, and '219 patents. District court found claims valid and infringed, but the Federal Circuit reversed under the on-sale bar and the Supreme Court affirmed invalidity.

Federal Circuit appeal of the D.N.J. consolidated action; reversed the district court and held asserted claims of the '724, '725, '424, and '219 patents invalid under the on-sale bar.

Delaware Hatch-Waxman ANDA action asserting the '724, '725, '424, '219, and '094 patents against Fresenius Kabi USA, LLC; terminated in 2015.

New Jersey Hatch-Waxman ANDA action (ANDA No. 205870) asserting the '724, '725, '424, '219, and '094 patents against Sagent Pharmaceuticals, Inc.; Sagent later settled.

Companion 505(b)(2)/NDA case in the Helsinn Aloxi palonosetron litigation, predominantly concerning the '724 chelating agent issue. Consolidated/related to the lead D.N.J. action.

Listed in Google Patents litigation data as a Federal Circuit case in the Helsinn family; no further details provided.

Listed as a related family case in the District of New Jersey; no further details provided.

Listed as a related consolidated action involving Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al.; no further details provided.

Listed as a related family case involving GAVIS Pharma LLC; no further details provided.

The April 5, 2016 opinion denied Hospira's motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction; the patents-in-suit included the '724 patent.

Listed in Google Patents litigation data for the Helsinn family; whether the '724 patent specifically was asserted was not individually verified.

District of Delaware action listed by DrugPatentWatch as citing the '724 patent (family).

Helsinn and Roche asserted U.S. Patents 7,947,724; 8,518,981; 8,598,218; 9,066,980; and 9,125,905 against Fresenius Kabi in D. Del. based on Fresenius's Notice Letter regarding NDA No. 208109 for palonosetron HCl IV. Helsinn voluntarily dismissed the action without prejudice on 2015-12-01, and it was essentially refiled in New Jersey.

Helsinn and Roche filed a patent-infringement action against Qilu in D.N.J. after Qilu's Paragraph IV letter regarding the '905 patent. The case was closed/dismissed, but the narrative notes uncertainty whether the '905 patent itself was pleaded; FDA's tentative-approval letter described the Qilu litigation as asserting the '724, '094, '980, and '942 patents instead.

ANDA action asserting U.S. 7,947,724 and U.S. 9,066,980. Stayed pending resolution of Civil Action No. 14-4274; ended by stipulated dismissal without prejudice after Actavis withdrew its NDA.