Genzyme Corporation v. Sarepta Therapeutics, Inc. et al
| Genzyme Corporation |
| Sarepta Therapeutics Three, LLC and Sarepta Therapeutics, Inc. |
| 1:2024cv00882 |
| July 26, 2024 |
| US District Court for the District of Delaware |
| Richard G Andrews |
| Patent |
| 35 U.S.C. ยง 1 Patent Infringement |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on August 2, 2024. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 12 MOTION for Pro Hac Vice Appearance of Attorney Noah M. Leibowitz - filed by Genzyme Corporation. (Czerwonka, Scott) |
| Filing 11 Pro Hac Vice Fee - Credit Card Payment received for Noah M. Leibowitz. ( Payment of $ 50, receipt number ADEDC-4466842).(Wilks, David) |
| Filing 10 MOTION for Pro Hac Vice Appearance of Attorney Amanda K. Antons - filed by Genzyme Corporation. (Czerwonka, Scott) |
| Filing 9 MOTION for Pro Hac Vice Appearance of Attorney Martin J. Black - filed by Genzyme Corporation. (Czerwonka, Scott) |
| Filing 8 MOTION for Pro Hac Vice Appearance of Attorney Katherine A. Helm - filed by Genzyme Corporation. (Czerwonka, Scott) |
| Filing 7 MOTION for Pro Hac Vice Appearance of Attorney Jonathan D.J. Loeb - filed by Genzyme Corporation. (Czerwonka, Scott) |
| Filing 6 MOTION for Pro Hac Vice Appearance of Attorney Sharon K. Gagliardi - filed by Genzyme Corporation. (Czerwonka, Scott) |
| Filing 5 Pro Hac Vice Fee - Credit Card Payment received for Sharon K. Gagliardi, Jonathan D.J. Loeb, Katherine A. Helm, Martin J. Black, and Amanda K. Antons. ( Payment of $ 250, receipt number ADEDC-4466711).(Wilks, David) |
SO ORDERED, re #7 MOTION for Pro Hac Vice Appearance of Attorney Jonathan D.J. Loeb, filed by Genzyme Corporation, #6 MOTION for Pro Hac Vice Appearance of Attorney Sharon K. Gagliardi, filed by Genzyme Corporation, #8 MOTION for Pro Hac Vice Appearance of Attorney Katherine A. Helm filed by Genzyme Corporation, #10 MOTION for Pro Hac Vice Appearance of Attorney Amanda K. Antons, filed by Genzyme Corporation, #9 MOTION for Pro Hac Vice Appearance of Attorney Martin J. Black, filed by Genzyme Corporation, and #12 MOTION for Pro Hac Vice Appearance of Attorney Noah M. Leibowitz, filed by Genzyme Corporation. Signed by Judge Richard G. Andrews on 8/2/2024. (nms)
|
| Pro Hac Vice Attorney Jonathan D.J. Loeb, Noah M. Leibowitz, Amanda K. Antons, Sharon K. Gagliardi, Katherine A. Helm for Genzyme Corporation added for electronic noticing. Pursuant to Local Rule 83.5 (d)., Delaware counsel shall be the registered users of CM/ECF and shall be required to file all papers. (mws) |
| Case Assigned to Judge Richard G. Andrews. Please include the initials of the Judge (RGA) after the case number on all documents filed. (rjb) |
| Filing 4 Report to the Commissioner of Patents and Trademarks for Patent/Trademark Number(s) 9,051,542; 7,704,721 . (Czerwonka, Scott) |
| Filing 3 Disclosure Statement pursuant to Rule 7.1: identifying Corporate Parent Aventis Inc., Other Affiliate Sanofi for Genzyme Corporation filed by Genzyme Corporation. (oam) |
| Filing 2 Notice, Consent and Referral forms re: U.S. Magistrate Judge jurisdiction. (oam) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT for PATENT INFRINGEMENT filed with Jury Demand against Sarepta Therapeutics Three, LLC, Sarepta Therapeutics, Inc. ( Filing fee $ 405, receipt number ADEDC-4462061.) - filed by Genzyme Corporation. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A-D, #2 Exhibit E-H, #3 Civil Cover Sheet)(oam) |
| No Summons Issued. (oam) |
Access additional case information on PACER
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the Delaware District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
