« Law - Another Circuit Weighs in on the Interstate Sale of Wine | Main | Indiana Decisions - Transfer List for Week Ending Feb. 13, 2004 »

Friday, February 13, 2004

Indiana Law - Lilly Trial Goes to Judge

Following up on our Feb. 8 entry about this trial (scroll down), the Indianapolis Star reports here this morning:

A federal trial over the validity of Eli Lilly and Co.'s most valuable patent ended Thursday with a Lilly attorney describing the stakes in stark terms to the judge. * * *

Closing comments before U.S. District Court Judge Richard L. Young lasted about three hours and summarized testimony from some two dozen witnesses and more than 500 exhibits entered into evidence during the trial in the federal courthouse Downtown. The case began about 21/2 years ago when Lilly sued for patent infringement the first of three generic drug firms that have sought approval to sell non-brand versions of Zyprexa in the United States.

A quick ruling by the judge isn't likely in the nonjury case. Both sides want to submit post-trial briefs to the judge, summarizing the voluminous trial evidence. After attorneys agreed Wednesday to a schedule that would see the final post-trial brief filed June 4, Lipsey told Young Thursday that Lilly wants that schedule shortened. He said a stay order expires March 30 that prevents one of the generic firms from selling generic Zyprexa while the infringement case is ongoing.

Because "I cannot leave Lilly exposed" to possible generic competition after March 30, Lipsey said he wants briefs filed before then. Young ordered both sides to agree by Feb. 20 to a new schedule for submitting post-trial briefs or he will set the dates himself.

[Update 2/16/04] "Lilly fared well in trial, analysts say," is the headline to this story in the Business Section of the Indianapolis Star. The lead:
The generic drug firms that want to undercut Eli Lilly and Co.'s chief asset, its U.S. patent on Zyprexa, went into trial against Lilly knowing they had a high legal hurdle to jump: Present "clear and convincing" proof to the judge that the patent is invalid. They failed to clear that hurdle, according to two patent attorneys who were among a small number of experts paid to follow the three-week case for investors.

Posted by Marcia Oddi on February 13, 2004 08:27 AM
Posted to Indiana Law