Cases 41 - 50 of 80
Cephalon Inc. v. Sandoz Inc.
as 1:2013cv02104
Plaintiff:
Cephalon Inc.
Defendant:
Sandoz Inc.
Counter_claimant:
Sandoz Inc.
Counter_defendant:
Cephalon Inc.
Cause Of Action: 35 U.S.C. § 271
Cephalon Inc. v. Hospira Inc.
as 1:2013cv02094
Plaintiff:
Cephalon Inc.
Defendant:
Hospira Inc.
Cause Of Action: 35 U.S.C. § 271
Cephalon Inc. v. Accord Healthcare Inc. et al
as 1:2013cv02095
Plaintiff:
Cephalon Inc.
Defendant:
Accord Healthcare Inc. and Intas Pharmaceuticals Ltd.
Cause Of Action: 35 U.S.C. § 271
Cephalon Inc. v. Sun Pharma Global FZE et al
as 1:2013cv02096
Plaintiff:
Cephalon Inc.
Defendant:
Sun Pharma Global FZE, Sun Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd. and Sun Pharmaceutical Industries Inc.
Cause Of Action: 35 U.S.C. § 271
Cephalon Inc. v. Glenmark Pharmaceuticals Ltd. et al
as 1:2013cv02093
Plaintiff:
Cephalon Inc.
Defendant:
Glenmark Pharmaceuticals Ltd. , Glenmark Generics Ltd. , Glenmark Generics S.A. and others
Cause Of Action: 35 U.S.C. § 271
Cephalon Inc. v. Dr. Reddy's Laboratories Ltd. et al
as 1:2013cv02082
Plaintiff:
Cephalon Inc.
Defendant:
Dr. Reddy's Laboratories Ltd. and Dr. Reddy's Laboratories Inc.
Cause Of Action: 35 U.S.C. § 271
Cephalon Inc. v. InnoPharma Inc.
as 1:2013cv02081
Plaintiff:
Cephalon Inc.
Defendant:
InnoPharma Inc.
Cause Of Action: 35 U.S.C. § 271
Cephalon Inc. v. Agila Specialties Inc. et al
as 1:2013cv02080
Plaintiff:
Cephalon Inc.
Defendant:
Agila Specialties Inc. and Onco Therapies Limited
Cause Of Action: 35 U.S.C. § 271
Cephalon Inc. v. Hetero Labs Ltd. et al
as 1:2013cv02046
Plaintiff:
Cephalon Inc.
Defendant:
Hetero Labs Ltd. and Hetero USA Inc.
Cause Of Action: 35 U.S.C. § 271
Cephalon Inc. v. Eagle Pharmaceuticals Inc.
as 1:2013cv01738
Plaintiff:
Cephalon Inc.
Defendant:
Eagle Pharmaceuticals Inc.
Counter_claimant:
Eagle Pharmaceuticals Inc.
Counter_defendant:
Cephalon Inc.
Cause Of Action: 35 U.S.C. § 271
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.
