Recent

% | $
Quotes you view appear here for quick access.

IntelliPharmaCeutics International Inc. Message Board

  • teberb teberb Jul 20, 2014 7:56 PM Flag

    Par, Purdue Settle IP Claims In OxyContin Antitrust MDL

    Par, Purdue Settle IP Claims In OxyContin Antitrust MDL

    Share us on: ๏‚ ๏‚‚ ๏‚Œ By Dan Prochilo
    Law360, New York (September 25, 2013, 9:49 PM ET) -- Par Pharmaceutical Cos. Inc. has settled a suit alleging its proposed generic OxyContin infringed Purdue Pharma LP patents for a tamper-resistant form of the widely abused painkiller, according to a consent judgment Tuesday laying to rest claims that were rolled into antitrust multidistrict litigation in New York federal court.
    Par acknowledged under the settlement that the generic oxycodone for which it was seeking U.S. Food and Drug Administration approval infringed Purdue's five patents and agreed not to market, sell or distribute its drug until a set date that was not specified by U.S. District Judge Sidney Stein's judgment.

    The generic-drug maker also agreed to drop any potential antitrust or other claims against Purdue from an MDL alleging Purdue unlawfully tried monopolizing the market for oxycodone by filing infringement suits against competitors and entering settlements delaying the release of their rival drugs.

    Purdue's infringement suit was dismissed with prejudice with respect to Par's abbreviated new drug application to the FDA, in exchange for Par waiving "any possible antitrust or other claims against the plaintiffs based on conduct or events that have occurred prior to the date of entry of this consent judgment," according to Judge Stein's order.

    The full details of the settlement were not publicly available, and representatives for the parties did not immediately respond to requests for comment Wednesday.

    The suit filed against Par on March 23, 2011, was one of many Purdue filed against generic-drug makers that year, claiming their applications to the FDA showed they had copied the patent holder's proprietary method for making an "abuse-proof" form of OxyContin.

    Par and Purdue settled on the eve of a trial in the infringement cases against Impax Laboratories Inc., Sandoz Inc., Teva Pharmaceuti

    SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Most Replied Expand all replies
    • A couple things:

      1. I agree with Samsa, that this should not be seen as a negative for IPCI and Rexista. In fact it should be seen as a positive.
      2. Oxycontin in its current marketed form is not tamper proof. There are many people crushing and snorting/eating it to get high. Oxycontin is the drug of choice for many addicts. The FDA is very likely to make it hard for anyone to market a generic version of this drug without tamper proof features.
      3. tederb- time to cover and go long.

    • Teberb......not sure why you posted that info here? it has nothing to do with IPCI's Rexista. Matter of fact IPCI is the ONLY generic drug out there that does NOT infringe on purdues patent because it is propritary patent. while Teva won the lawsuit in January of 2014 th3 Judge found that their drig did infringe on Purdues patent. I'm not sure why the judge then ruled against Purdue, but Purdue is now appealing. Leaving IPCI and their Rexista the only game in town

      • 1 Reply to samsa1
      • The point is they say they are filing Rexista as a NDA.
        This would give them 3 years exclusivity. 3 years on an almost 3 billion dollar drug would be massive. everyone else is filing as an ANDA (generic drug). And some have settled.

        Now explain how everyone else files this as a generic and IPCI files as NDA.

        If Rexista is protected by patents why were they so afraid to partner out side the US. They stated they were concerned that a foreign company would reverse engineer and sell it on their own.

 
IPCI
2.92-0.09(-2.99%)Jul 2 4:00 PMEDT