Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
G.JAYACHANDRAN, MUMMINENI SUDHEER KUMAR
Softgel Healthcare Private Limited – Appellant
Versus
Pfizer Inc. – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. pfizer holds patent for vyndamax. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. relief sought for evidence collection. (Para 3) |
| 3. softgel argues against letters rogatory. (Para 4) |
| 4. court rules on softgel's role in the dispute. (Para 5) |
| 5. softgel contends letters rogatory harms its interests. (Para 6) |
| 6. rejection of pfizer's patent in india is pivotal. (Para 7 , 8) |
| 7. abuse of legal process in third-party requests. (Para 9 , 10) |
| 8. letters rogatory are recognized in india. (Para 11 , 12 , 14) |
| 9. article 23 of hague convention limits execution. (Para 15 , 22 , 23) |
| 10. court dismisses letters rogatory; enforcement not allowed. (Para 32 , 34) |
COMMON JUDGMENT
Dr.G.Jayachandran, J.& Mummineni Sudheer Kumar, J.
M/s.Pfizer Inc., a company incorporated in New York, USA, is the holder of the patent for the crystalline forms of TAFAMIDIS 61 mg, sold under the brand name ‘VYNDAMAX’ in USA. On submission of Abbreviated New Drug Applications ('ANDA') before the US Patent Office by M/s.Cipla and M/s.Hikma (formerly Zenara). Pfizer asserted that, their Patent No:9,7770,441 (441 patent), protected by United States Patent law, is under threat of infringement. M/s. Ffizer filed suit Civil Action No:23-879 (GBW) (CJB)
The main legal point established in the judgment is the binding effect of the settlement between the parties, the waiver of the right to seek re-employment by the workmen, and the entitlement of the ....
A lockout is justified if it is declared in response to an illegal strike or a strike that is in breach of a settlement or award.
The combination of eyewitness testimonies, recovery of the weapon used, and forensic examination results can establish guilt in criminal cases, even based on circumstantial evidence.
The conviction of an accused person under Section 27(3) of the Arms Act is not permissible in law if the accused is also charged with committing murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
The court can enhance compensation based on the deceased's income and family dependency, and adjust the multiplier used by the Tribunal if found unjustified.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
