throbber
Case 1:14—cv—O7105—JBS—KMW Document 37 Filed 03/09/15 Page 1 of 12 Page|D: 650
`
`Douglass C. Hochstetler (dhochstetler@kelleydrye.com)
`(pro hac vice application forthcoming)
`Christine A. Dudzik (cdudzik@kelleydrye.com)
`(pro hac vice application forthcoming)
`KELLEY DRYE & WARREN LLP
`
`333 W. Wacker Drive, Suite 2600
`
`Chicago, IL 60606
`Telephone: 312-857-7000
`Facsimile: 312-857-7095
`
`Beth D. Jacob (b'acob@kelleydrye.com)
`(pro hac vice application forthcoming)
`Clifford Katz (ckatz@kelleydrye.com)
`KELLEY DRYE & WARREN LLP
`101 Park Avenue
`
`New York, NY 10178
`
`Telephone: 212-808-7800
`Facsimile: 212-808-7897
`
`Michael A. Innes (minnes@kelleydrye.com)
`KELLEY DRYE & WARREN LLP
`200 Kimball Drive
`
`Parsippany, New Jersey 07054
`Telephone: (973) 503-5900
`Facsimile: (973) 503-5950
`
`IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`
`FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY
`
`C.A. No. 1:14-cv-07105-JBS-KMW
`
`) ) ) ) ) )
`
`) ) )
`
`) ) )
`
`OTSUKA PHARMACEUTICAL CO., LTD.,
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`v.
`
`LUPIN LIMITED, LUPIN ATLANTIS
`
`HOLDING SA, LUPIN
`
`PHARMACEUTICALS, INC., and HETERO
`
`LABS LIMITED,
`
`Defendants.
`
`LUPIN’S ANSWER TO AMENDED COMPLAINT
`
`FOR PATENT INFRINGMENT
`
`NY01\KatzC\3961976.1
`
`Janssen Ex. 2034
`
`Lupin Ltd. v. Janssen Sciences Ireland UC
`|PR2015-01030
`
`(Page 1 of 12)
`
`

`
`Case 1:14—cv—O7105—JBS—KMW Document 37 Filed 03/09/15 Page 2 of 12 Page|D: 651
`
`Defendants Lupin Limited, Lupin Atlantis Holdings SA and Lupin
`
`Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (collectively, “Lupin”), by and through their attorneys, respond to each of
`
`the numbered paragraphs in the Amended Complaint filed against them by Plaintiff Otsuka
`
`Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd. (“Plaintiff ’ or “Otsuka”) as follows:
`
`Lupin denies all allegations contained in headings, unnumbered paragraphs, and
`
`the “Wherefore” clause in the Amended Complaint. Otuska does not distinguish Lupin from
`
`Hetero Labs Limited (“Hetero”) in certain allegations, and instead makes allegations against
`
`“Defendants” generally; Lupin denies any explicit or implicit allegations that Lupin acted on
`
`behalf of, or jointly with, Hetero. Lupin further denies all allegations set forth in the Amended
`
`Complaint that are not specifically admitted.
`
`THE PARTIES
`
`l.
`
`Lupin lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief about the
`
`truth of the allegations set forth in paragraph 1 of the Amended Complaint.
`
`2.
`
`Lupin admits the allegations set forth in paragraph 2 of the Amended
`
`Complaint.
`
`Complaint.
`
`Complaint.
`
`3.
`
`Lupin admits the allegations set forth in paragraph 3 of the Amended
`
`4.
`
`Lupin admits the allegations set forth in paragraph 4 of the Amended
`
`5.
`
`Lupin lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief about the
`
`truth of the allegations set forth in paragraph 5 of the Amended Complaint.
`
`NY0l\KatzC\396l976.l
`
`Janssen Ex. 2034
`
`Lupin Ltd. v. Janssen Sciences Ireland UC
`|PR2015-01030
`
`(Page 2 of 12)
`
`

`
`Case 1:14—cv—O7105—JBS—KMW Document 37 Filed 03/09/15 Page 3 of 12 Page|D: 652
`
`NATURE OF THE ACTION
`
`6.
`
`Lupin admits that Plaintiffs purport to bring an action for patent
`
`infringement under the patent laws of the United States, but otherwise denies the allegations set
`
`forth in Paragraph 6 of the Amended Complaint.
`
`JURISDICTION AND VENUE
`
`7.
`
`Lupin admits the allegations set forth in paragraph 7 of the Amended
`
`Complaint.
`
`8.
`
`Lupin Limited states that it does not contest personal jurisdiction in this
`
`District solely for the purposes of this action, but otherwise denies the allegations set forth in
`
`Paragraph 8 of the Amended Complaint, except admits that Lupin Limited manufactures
`
`pharmaceutical products and refers to the Annual Report and the cited Lupin websites for a
`
`complete and accurate statement of their contents.
`
`9.
`
`Lupin Atlantis Holdings SA states that it does not contest personal
`
`jurisdiction in this District solely for the purposes of this action, but otherwise denies the
`
`allegations set forth in Paragraph 9 of the Amended Complaint.
`
`10.
`
`Lupin Pharmaceuticals, Inc. states that it does not contest personal
`
`jurisdiction in this District, solely for the purposes of this action, but otherwise denies the
`
`allegations set forth in Paragraph 10 of the Amended Complaint, except admits that Lupin
`
`Pharmaceuticals, Inc. distributes generic pharmaceutical products in the United States, including
`
`generic pharmaceutical products manufactured by Lupin Limited, and refers to the cited Lupin
`
`websites for a complete and accurate statement of their contents.
`
`ll.
`
`Lupin denies the allegations set forth in Paragraph 11 of the Amended
`
`Complaint, and refers to the cited Lupin websites for a complete and accurate statement of their
`
`contents.
`
`NY0l\KatzC\396l976.l
`
`Janssen Ex. 2034
`
`Lupin Ltd. v. Janssen Sciences Ireland UC
`|PR2015-01030
`
`(Page 3 of 12)
`
`

`
`Case 1:14—cv—O7105—JBS—KMW Document 37 Filed 03/09/15 Page 4 of 12 Page|D: 653
`
`12.
`
`Lupin lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief about the
`
`truth of the allegations set forth in paragraph 12 of the Amended Complaint
`
`13.
`
`Lupin states that it does not contest Venue in this District solely for the
`
`purposes of this action, but otherwise denies the allegations set forth in Paragraph 13 of the
`
`Amended Complaint.
`
`FIRST COUNT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT
`
`14.
`
`Lupin admits the allegations in Paragraph 14 of the Amended Complaint
`
`that, according to the face of the patent, U.S. Patent No. 8,017,615 (‘"615 patent”) was issued by
`
`the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (“PTO”) on September 13, 2011, that it is entitled “Low
`
`Hygroscopic Aripiprazole Drug Substance and Processes for the Preparation Thereof,” and that a
`
`copy of the patent is attached to the Amended Complaint, but denies that the patent was duly and
`
`legally issued.
`
`15.
`
`Lupin lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief about the
`
`truth of the allegations in Paragraph 15 of the Amended Complaint.
`
`16.
`
`Lupin lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief about the
`
`truth of the allegations in Paragraph 16 of the Amended Complaint.
`
`17.
`
`Lupin denies the allegations in Paragraph 17 of the Amended Complaint,
`
`and refers to the ’615 patent for a complete and accurate statement of its terms.
`
`18.
`
`Lupin lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief about the
`
`truth of the allegations in Paragraph 18 of the Amended Complaint, except admits that, upon
`
`information and belief, Otsuka is the holder of New Drug Application No. 21-436.
`
`19.
`
`Lupin lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief about the
`
`truth of the allegations in Paragraph 19 of the Amended Complaint, except admits that, the ’615
`
`NY01\KatzC\3961976.1
`
`Janssen Ex. 2034
`
`Lupin Ltd. v. Janssen Sciences Ireland UC
`|PR2015-01030
`
`(Page 4 of 12)
`
`

`
`Case 1:14—cv—O7105—JBS—KMW Document 37 Filed 03/09/15 Page 5 of 12 Page|D: 654
`
`patent is listed in the FDA’s Orange Book: Approved Drug Products with Therapeutic
`
`Equivalence Evaluations in connection with NDA No. 21-436.
`
`20.
`
`Upon information and belief, Lupin admits the allegations in Paragraph 20
`
`of the Amended Complaint.
`
`21.
`
`Lupin Atlantis Holdings SA admits that it submitted ANDA No. 205589
`
`to the FDA, under Section 505(j) of the Act, 21 U.S.C § 355(j). The allegations of Paragraph 21
`
`of the Amended Complaint are otherwise denied.
`
`22.
`
`Lupin admits the allegations in Paragraph 22 of the Amended Complaint.
`
`23.
`
`Lupin admits the allegations in Paragraph 23 of the Amended Complaint.
`
`24.
`
`Lupin denies the allegations in Paragraph 24 of the Amended Complaint.
`
`25.
`
`Lupin denies the allegations in Paragraph 25 of the Amended Complaint.
`
`26.
`
`Lupin denies the allegations in Paragraph 26 of the Amended Complaint,
`
`except admits that, as indicated on its Form FDA 356h, Lupin Pharmaceuticals, Inc. is
`
`designated as Lupin Atlantis Holdings SA’s “Authorized U.S. Agent” for ANDA No. 205589.
`
`SECOND COUNT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT
`
`27.
`
`Lupin incorporates herein its answers to the allegations made in
`
`Paragraphs 18 through 23 of the Amended Complaint, as if those answers had been realleged and
`
`set forth again in full.
`
`28.
`
`Lupin admits the allegations in Paragraph 28 of the Amended Complaint
`
`that, according to the face of the patent, U.S. Patent No. 8,580,796 (‘"796 patent”) was issued by
`
`the PTO on November 12, 2013, that it is entitled “Low Hygroscopic Aripiprazole Drug
`
`Substance and Processes for the Preparation Thereof,” and that a copy of the patent is attached to
`
`the Amended Complaint, but denies that the patent was duly and legally is sued.
`
`NY0l\KatzC\396l976.l
`
`Janssen Ex. 2034
`
`Lupin Ltd. v. Janssen Sciences Ireland UC
`|PR2015-01030
`
`(Page 5 of 12)
`
`

`
`Case 1:14—cv—O7105—JBS—KMW Document 37 Filed 03/09/15 Page 6 of 12 Page|D: 655
`
`29.
`
`Lupin lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief about the
`
`truth of the allegations in Paragraph 29 of the Amended Complaint.
`
`30.
`
`Lupin lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief about the
`
`truth of the allegations in Paragraph 30 of the Amended Complaint.
`
`31.
`
`Lupin denies the allegations in Paragraph 31 of the Amended Complaint,
`
`and refers to the ’796 patent for a complete and accurate statement of its terms.
`
`32.
`
`Lupin lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief about the
`
`truth of the allegations in Paragraph 32 of the Amended Complaint, except admits that, the ’796
`
`patent is listed in the FDA’s Orange Book: Approved Drug Products with Therapeutic
`
`Equivalence Evaluations in connection with NDA No. 21-436.
`
`33.
`
`Lupin admits the allegations in Paragraph 33 of the Amended Complaint.
`
`34.
`
`Lupin denies the allegations in Paragraph 34 of the Amended Complaint.
`
`35.
`
`Lupin denies the allegations in Paragraph 35 of the Amended Complaint.
`
`36.
`
`Lupin denies the allegations in Paragraph 36 of the Amended Complaint,
`
`except admits that, as indicated on its Form FDA 356h, Lupin Pharmaceuticals, Inc. is
`
`designated as Lupin Atlantis Holdings SA’s “Authorized U.S. Agent” for ANDA No. 205589.
`
`THIRD COUNT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT
`
`37.
`
`Lupin incorporates herein its answers to the allegations made in
`
`Paragraphs 18 through 23 of the Amended Complaint, as if those answers had been realleged and
`
`set forth again in full.
`
`38.
`
`Lupin admits the allegations in Paragraph 38 of the Amended Complaint
`
`that, according to the face of the patent, U.S. Patent No. 8,642,760 (‘"760 patent”) was issued by
`
`the PTO on February 4, 2014, that it is entitled “Low Hygroscopic Aripiprazole Drug Substance
`
`NY01\KatzC\3961976.1
`
`Janssen Ex. 2034
`
`Lupin Ltd. v. Janssen Sciences Ireland UC
`|PR2015-01030
`
`(Page 6 of 12)
`
`

`
`Case 1:14—cv—O7105—JBS—KMW Document 37 Filed 03/09/15 Page 7 of 12 Page|D: 656
`
`and Processes for the Preparation Thereof,” and that a copy of the patent is attached to the
`
`Amended Complaint, but denies that the patent was duly and legally issued.
`
`39.
`
`Lupin lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief about the
`
`truth of the allegations in Paragraph 39 of the Amended Complaint.
`
`40.
`
`Lupin lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief about the
`
`truth of the allegations in Paragraph 40 of the Amended Complaint.
`
`41.
`
`Lupin denies the allegations in Paragraph 41 of the Amended Complaint,
`
`and refers to the ’760 patent for a complete and accurate statement of its terms.
`
`42.
`
`Lupin lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief about the
`
`truth of the allegations in Paragraph 42 of the Amended Complaint, except admits that, the ’760
`
`patent is listed in the FDA’s Orange Book: Approved Drug Products with Therapeutic
`
`Equivalence Evaluations in connection with NDA No. 21-436.
`
`43.
`
`Lupin admits the allegations in Paragraph 43 of the Amended Complaint.
`
`44.
`
`Lupin denies the allegations in Paragraph 44 of the Amended Complaint.
`
`45.
`
`Lupin denies the allegations in Paragraph 45 of the Amended Complaint.
`
`46.
`
`Lupin denies the allegations in Paragraph 46 of the Amended Complaint,
`
`except admits that, as indicated on its Form FDA 356h, Lupin Pharmaceuticals, Inc. is
`
`designated as Lupin Atlantis Holdings SA’s “Authorized U.S. Agent” for ANDA No. 205589.
`
`FOURTH COUNT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT
`
`47.
`
`Lupin incorporates herein its answers to the allegations made in
`
`Paragraphs 18 through 23 of the Amended Complaint, as if those answers had been realleged and
`
`set forth again in full.
`
`48.
`
`Lupin admits the allegations in Paragraph 48 of the Complaint that,
`
`according to the face of the patent, U.S. Patent No. 8,759,350 (‘"350 patent”) was issued by the
`
`NY0l\KatzC\396l976.l
`
`7
`
`Janssen Ex. 2034
`
`Lupin Ltd. v. Janssen Sciences Ireland UC
`|PR2015-01030
`
`(Page 7 of 12)
`
`

`
`Case 1:14—cv—O7105—JBS—KMW Document 37 Filed 03/09/15 Page 8 of 12 Page|D: 657
`
`PTO on June 24, 2014, that it is entitled “Carbostyril Derivatives and Serotonin Reuptake
`
`Inhibitors for Treatment of Mood Disorders,” and that a copy of the patent is attached to the
`
`Complaint, but denies that the patent was duly and legally issued.
`
`49.
`
`Lupin lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief about the
`
`truth of the allegations in Paragraph 49 of the Amended Complaint.
`
`50.
`
`Lupin lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief about the
`
`truth of the allegations in Paragraph 50 of the Amended Complaint.
`
`51.
`
`Lupin denies the allegations in Paragraph 51 of the Amended Complaint,
`
`and refers to the ’350 patent for a complete and accurate statement of its terms.
`
`52.
`
`Lupin lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief about the
`
`truth of the allegations in Paragraph 52 of the Amended Complaint, except admits that, the ’35O
`
`patent is listed in the FDA’s Orange Book: Approved Drug Products with Therapeutic
`
`Equivalence Evaluations in connection with NDA No. 21-436.
`
`53.
`
`Lupin admits the allegations in Paragraph 53 of the Amended Complaint.
`
`54.
`
`Lupin denies the allegations in Paragraph 54 of the Amended Complaint.
`
`55.
`
`Lupin denies the allegations in Paragraph 55 of the Amended Complaint.
`
`56.
`
`Lupin denies the allegations in Paragraph 56 of the Amended Complaint,
`
`except admits that, as indicated on its Form FDA 356h, Lupin Pharmaceuticals, Inc. is
`
`designated as Lupin Atlantis Holdings SA’s “Authorized U.S. Agent” for ANDA No. 205589.
`
`57.
`
`Lupin denies all allegations not specifically admitted herein, and further
`
`denies that Plaintiffs are entitled to the judgment and relief requested in the Wherefore clause set
`
`forth in the Amended Complaint or to any relief whatsoever.
`
`NY0l\KatzC\396l976.l
`
`Janssen Ex. 2034
`
`Lupin Ltd. v. Janssen Sciences Ireland UC
`|PR2015-01030
`
`(Page 8 of 12)
`
`

`
`Case 1:14—cv—O7105—JBS—KMW Document 37 Filed 03/09/15 Page 9 of 12 Page|D: 658
`
`AFFIRMATIVE AND OTHER DEFENSES
`
`Lupin, without any admission as to burden of proof and without prejudice to the
`
`denials set forth in its Answer, alleges the following defenses to the allegations in the Amended
`
`Complaint. Lupin reserves the right to supplement this Answer, including the right to assert
`
`additional defenses.
`
`(Non-infringement of the ’615, ’796, ’760, and ’350 patents)
`
`FIRST DEFENSE
`
`5 8.
`
`The manufacture, use, offer for sale, sale, or importation of Lupin’s
`
`Aripiprazole Tablets, 2—mg, 5—mg,
`
`lO—mg, l5—mg, 20—mg, and 30—mg (“Lupin’s ANDA
`
`Products”) does not and will not infringe any valid claim of the ’6l5, ’796, ’760, and ’350
`
`patents, either literally or under the doctrine of equivalents. Lupin further does not indirectly
`
`infringe any method of use claim in these patents because, inter alia, there exists substantial non-
`
`infringing uses and Lupin has a good faith basis that the claims of these patents are invalid
`
`and/or not infringed.
`
`SECOND DEFENSE
`
`(Invalidity of the ’615, ’796, ’760, and ’350 patents)
`
`59.
`
`The claims of the ’6l5, ’796, ’760, and ’35O patents are invalid for failing
`
`to meet a condition for patentability set forth in 35 U.S.C. § 101 et seq. By way of example and
`
`not of limitation, one or more of the claims of the ’6l5, ’796, ’760, and ’35O patents are invalid
`
`for indefiniteness under 35 USC § 112 if such claims are construed to encompass Lupin’s
`
`ANDA Products.
`
`THIRD DEFENSE
`
`gFailure to State a Claim)
`
`60.
`
`The Amended Complaint fails to state a claim against Lupin upon which
`
`relief can be granted with respect to the ’350 patent (Fourth Count).
`
`NY0l\KatzC\396l976.l
`
`Janssen Ex. 2034
`
`Lupin Ltd. v. Janssen Sciences Ireland UC
`|PR2015-01030
`
`(Page 9 of 12)
`
`

`
`Case 1:14—cv—O7105—JBS—KMW Document 37 Filed 03/09/15 Page 10 of 12 Page|D: 659
`
`61.
`
`Additionally, to the extent that Plaintiff alleges that Lupin’s actions make
`
`this case exceptional under 35 U.S.C. § 285, the Amended Complaint further fails to state a
`
`claim upon which relief can be granted.
`
`FOURTH DEFENSE
`
`62.
`
`Any additional defenses that discovery may reveal.
`
`WHEREFORE, Lupin respectfully requests the Court to enter judgment against
`
`Plaintiff as follows:
`
`(a)
`
`dismissing the Amended Complaint in its entirety with prejudice and
`
`entering judgment in favor of Lupin against Plaintiff;
`
`(b)
`
`that this is an exceptional case under 35 U.S.C. § 285, and an award to
`
`Lupin of its costs and fees incurred in defending this action;
`
`(c)
`
`and such other and further relief as the Court may deem just and proper.
`
`Dated: March 9, 2015
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`KELLEY DRYE & WARREN LLP
`
`s/ Michael A. Innes
`
`Michael A. Innes
`
`200 Kimball Drive
`
`Parsippany, New Jersey 07054
`(973) 503-5900
`
`Beth D. Jacob
`
`(pro hac vice application forthcoming)
`Clifford Katz
`
`101 Park Avenue
`
`New York, NY 10178
`
`(212) 808-7800
`
`Douglass C. Hochstetler
`(pro hac vice application forthcoming)
`Christine A. Dudzik
`
`(pro hac vice application forthcoming)
`10
`
`Janssen Ex. 2034
`
`Lupin Ltd. v. Janssen Sciences Ireland UC
`|PR2015-01030
`
`(Page 10 of 12)
`
`NY01\KatzC\3961976.1
`
`

`
`Case 1:14—cv—O7105—JBS—KMW Document 37 Filed 03/09/15 Page 11 of 12 Page|D: 660
`
`333 W. Wacker Drive, Suite 2600
`
`Chicago, IL 60606
`(312) 857-7000
`
`Attorneys for Defendants Lapin Limited,
`Lapin Atlantis Holdings SA and
`
`Lapin Pharmaceuticals, Inc.
`
`NY01\KatzC\3961976.1
`
`11
`
`Janssen Ex. 2034
`
`Lupin Ltd. v. Janssen Sciences Ireland UC
`|PR2015-01030
`
`(Page 11 of 12)
`
`

`
`Case 1:14—cv—O7105—JBS—KMW Document 37 Filed 03/09/15 Page 12 of 12 Page|D: 661
`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`
`I hereby certify that on March 9, 2015, I caused a copy of the foregoing Lupin’s Answer
`
`to Amended Complaint for Patent Infringement to be served Via the Court’s ECF system upon all
`
`counsel of record
`
`By:
`
`s/ Michael A. Innes
`Michael A. Innes
`
`NY0l\KatzC\396l976.l
`
`12
`
`Janssen Ex. 2034
`
`Lupin Ltd. v. Janssen Sciences Ireland UC
`|PR2015-01030
`
`(Page 12 of 12)

This document is available on Docket Alarm but you must sign up to view it.


Or .

Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.

After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.

Accept $ Charge
throbber

Still Working On It

This document is taking longer than usual to download. This can happen if we need to contact the court directly to obtain the document and their servers are running slowly.

Give it another minute or two to complete, and then try the refresh button.

throbber

A few More Minutes ... Still Working

It can take up to 5 minutes for us to download a document if the court servers are running slowly.

Thank you for your continued patience.

This document could not be displayed.

We could not find this document within its docket. Please go back to the docket page and check the link. If that does not work, go back to the docket and refresh it to pull the newest information.

Your account does not support viewing this document.

You need a Paid Account to view this document. Click here to change your account type.

Your account does not support viewing this document.

Set your membership status to view this document.

With a Docket Alarm membership, you'll get a whole lot more, including:

  • Up-to-date information for this case.
  • Email alerts whenever there is an update.
  • Full text search for other cases.
  • Get email alerts whenever a new case matches your search.

Become a Member

One Moment Please

The filing “” is large (MB) and is being downloaded.

Please refresh this page in a few minutes to see if the filing has been downloaded. The filing will also be emailed to you when the download completes.

Your document is on its way!

If you do not receive the document in five minutes, contact support at support@docketalarm.com.

Sealed Document

We are unable to display this document, it may be under a court ordered seal.

If you have proper credentials to access the file, you may proceed directly to the court's system using your government issued username and password.


Access Government Site

We are redirecting you
to a mobile optimized page.





Document Unreadable or Corrupt

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket

We are unable to display this document.

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket