More on the Lovenox case

The Orange County Business Journal gives some insights into the Lovenox case:

The Amphastar Pharmaceuticals Inc. team’s defense took a turn in 2004 when the lawyers said they found that Sanofi may have failed to disclose information about dosage sizes in the data submitted to patent examiners.

In 2005, U.S. District Judge Robert J. Timlin in Riverside dismissed the case after deciding Sanofi misled patent examiners to believe Lovenox lasted 250% longer than other drugs without disclosing the drugs were tested at different dosages.

A federal appeals court sent the case back to trial in 2006 to determine whether Sanofi intended to mislead patent examiners.

Amphastar and Teva showed “clear and convincing evidence” that Sanofi intentionally deceived patent examiners for financial gain, Judge Pfaelzer said, rejecting the notion that Sanofi withheld information through negligence.

The company’s intentions were “too egregious, too obvious and too consistently committed over too long a period of time,” Pfaelzer said.

One of the biggest challenges was to prevent Sanofi’s attorneys from slowing the case, the Stradling lawyers said.

"We tried to not let the case get bogged down with the brand company trying to convince the judge and the jury that the case was too complex or scientific to examine," Hanle said.

The lawyers said they benefited from the other side’s “memory loss.”

"The lawyers made the mistake of letting their clients have amnesia during the deposition and that really hurt them," Trusso said.