Spectrum Pharmaceuticals, Inc. et al v. Actavis LLC

Filing 15

JUDGMENT in favor of Actavis that claims 1 and 2 of the 829 patent are invalid, and claims 3, 4, and 5-14 of the 829 patent are not infringed by ANDA No. 206516 as if fully tried and adjudicated. Signed by Judge James C. Mahan on 6/22/16. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - JC)

C

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14

Michael J. McCue (Nevada Bar #6055)
Meng Zhong (Nevada Bar #12145)
LEWIS ROCA ROTHGERBER LLP
3993 Howard Hughes Parkway, Suite 600
Las Vegas, NV 89169-5996
[phone] (phone)
[phone] (facsimile)
[e-mail]
[e-mail]
Mark H. Izraelewicz
Thomas I. Ross
Kevin M. Flowers
Amanda Antons
MARSHALL, GERSTEIN & BORUN LLP
233 South Wacker Drive, 6300 Willis Tower
Chicago, IL 60606-6357
[phone] (phone)
[phone] (facsimile)
[e-mail]
[e-mail]
[e-mail]
[e-mail]

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

16

18

Attorneys for Defendant ACTAVIS LLC

Attorneys for Plaintiffs
SPECTRUM PHARMACEUTICALS, INC.
and UNIVERSITY OF STRATHCLYDE

15

17

Michael D. Rounds (Nevada Bar #4734)
Adam Yowell (Nevada Bar #11748)
BROWNSTEIN HYATT FARBER
SCHRECK, LLP
5371 Kietzke Lane
Reno, NV 89511
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: 775.333.8171
[e-mail]
[e-mail]

THE DISTRICT OF NEVADA
SPECTRUM PHARMACEUTICALS, INC.
and UNIVERSITY OF STRATHCLYDE,

19

Case No.: 2:15-cv-01360-JCM-GWF

Plaintiffs,

20

v.

21

JUDGMENT
ORDER

ACTAVIS LLC,

22

Defendant.

23
24

WHEREAS, on July 17, 2015, Plaintiffs Spectrum Pharmaceuticals, Inc. and University

25

of Strathclyde (collectively, “Plaintiffs”) commenced this action against Actavis LLC

26

(“Actavis”), alleging infringement of U.S. Patent No. 6,500,829 (“the ’829 patent”) under 35

27

U.S.C. § 271(a), (b), (c), and (e)(2)(A) (ECF No. 1);

28
Page 1 of 2

C

1

WHEREAS Plaintiffs and Actavis have jointly moved for final judgment in this action

2

in accordance with the Stipulation and Order to Lift Stay (ECF No. 10) and Stipulation and

3

Order to Enter Final Judgment (ECF No. 11).

4

NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED AS FOLLOWS:

5

Judgment is entered in favor of Actavis that claims 1 and 2 of the ’829 patent are

6

invalid, and claims 3, 4, and 5-14 of the ’829 patent are not infringed by ANDA No. 206516 as

7

if fully tried and adjudicated.

8
9
10
11

IT IS SO ORDERED:
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
June 22, 2016
DATED:

12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Page 2 of 2