Daiichi Sankyo Company, Ltd., et al. v. Mylan Pharmaceuticals, Inc. et al. S. Ct. 2011 — On March 21, 2011, the Supreme Court denied certorari, clinching Fitzpatrick's
major victory on behalf of client Daiichi Sankyo Company Limited against generic
drug maker Mylan Pharmaceuticals in a Hatch-Waxman patent lawsuit concerning
Daiichi Sankyo’s Benicar® family of high blood pressure medicines. After a two-
week trial, U.S District Judge William J. Martini in New Jersey had ruled that Mylan
infringed the Daiichi Sankyo patent on olmesartan medoxomil, the active ingredient
in Benicar®, rejecting Mylan’s defense that the patent was invalid for obviousness. On September 9, 2010, the Federal Circuit affirmed the district court’s opinion, noting that the opinion was “comprehensive” and “well-reasoned.” The blockbuster drug had worldwide sales of more than $1 billion last year.
Spath v. Geyer Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences 2008 — In an interference involving automobile engine components, Fitzpatrick prevailed on
behalf of our client, INA-Schaeffler KG (Senior Party Geyer). Fitzpatrick first defeated
preliminary motions by Junior Party Spath seeking judgment based on its allegations of
lack of written description and no interference-in-fact. Fitzpatrick then persuaded the
Board that Spath had not proven an earlier reduction to practice by virtue of an early
CAD model, and that Spath had failed to prove derivation of the invention through a
common customer. The Board entered judgment against Spath and cancelled the
corresponding claim from Spath’s previously issued patent.
Schaeffler KG v. Brastates Bearings Industries, et al. S.D. Fl. 2008 — On April 1, 2008 Fitzpatrick attorneys, on behalf of our client Schaeffler KG,
successfully obtained a temporary restraining and seizure order in a trademark
case against defendant Brastates Bearings Industries and related companies.
Thereafter, working in conjunction with the Miami U.S. Marshal’s Office and
local police, FCHS attorneys seized approximately $45,000 worth of counterfeit
ball bearings marked with Schaeffler’s FAG trademark from the defendant’s
warehouse in North Miami Beach, Florida.
Phillips-Van Heusen Corp., Calvin Klein, Inc., and Calvin Klein Trademark Trust v. Calvin Clothing Company, Inc. and Star Ride Kids, Inc. S.D.N.Y. 2006 — On behalf of their clients Phillips-Van Heusen and Calvin Klein, Inc., Fitzpatrick
attorneys recently prevailed after a one week trial by winning a judgment that
Calvin Clothing's attempt to use and register CALVIN trademarks for a wide variety
of apparel infringed on CALVIN KLEIN and CALVIN trademarks, and diluted these
trademarks under New York law. Judge Rakoff found that Calvin Clothing Company's
30 years of priority over Calvin Klein with use of CALVIN for one category of apparel
was not a basis for it to expand into other categories of apparel. Also, Judge Rakoff
found that use of CALVIN and CALVINS as abbreviations of the CALVIN KLEIN trademarks
by the public and media inured to Calvin Klein, Inc.'s benefit, and was a basis for
common law rights in CALVIN. Judge Rakoff ordered that defendants' expanded use
of CALVIN be immediately ceased.