Teva Pharmaceuticals Usa, Inc. v. Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation, Novartis Pharma Ag and Novartis International Pharmaceutical Ltd.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that Medlm-mune “overruled” the Federal Circuit’s reasonable-apprehension-of-suit test for determining the existence of an “actual controversy”
• observing that an ANDA filer suffers the requisite injury-in-fact where its ability to secure approval of its ANDA has been prevented by an NDA holder
• observing that an ANDA filer suffers the requisite injury-in-fact where its ability to secure approval of its ANDA has been prevented by an NDA holder
• explaining that \related litigation involving the same technology and the same parties is relevant in determining whether a justiciable declaratory judgment controversy exists on other related patents\
• noting that federal courts decide only “actual controversies” and are not to “give opinions upon moot questions or abstract proposi- tions”
• stating that the “threat of litigation” on unasserted patents and the “legal uncertainty” caused when a patent holder fails to sue an ANDA filer on all Paragraph IV Certified patents constitute “present injuries] sufficient for a justiciable controversy”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).