直 Japanese PDF Font
  • Our Professionals
  • Our Work
  • Our Insights
  • Offices
  • Firm
  • Careers
Finnegan
    • AI + Finnegan
    • Appeals, Issues, and Legal Strategy
    • Diligence, Licensing, and Opinions
    • Global IP Enforcement, Litigation, and Trials
    • Patent Office Invalidation Proceedings
    • Prosecution and Portfolio Management
    • Trademark and Brand Management
    • AI, Electronics, and Information Technology
    • Chemicals, Industrials, and Materials
    • Communications
    • Consumer Goods and Services
    • Energy
    • Hospitality, Gaming, and Leisure
    • Life Sciences
    • Transportation and Logistics
  • Experience

Experience

Federal Circuit, district court, and arbitration victories protect Cumberland Pharmaceuticals’ flagship product, Acetadote®

Cumberland Pharmaceuticals

Mylan Institutional, LLC

In decisions from the U.S. Federal Circuit Court of Appeals, U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, and the American Arbitration Association (AAA), Finnegan successfully prevented a larger competitor from manufacturing or selling a generic version of Finnegan client Cumberland Pharmaceuticals’ flagship product, Acetadote®, a life-saving intravenous formulation of acetylcysteine for the treatment of acetaminophen overdose. Cumberland’s current patent-protected formulation is free of the EDTA chelating agent, which is an improvement over earlier formulations sold by Cumberland and others. First, in the AAA decision, the arbitrator issued a final award in favor of Cumberland enjoining the competitor and further awarded attorney’s fees and costs to Cumberland. Second, in the Abbreviated New Drug Application (ANDA) district court case, following claim construction rulings favorable to Cumberland, the generic company conceded infringement. A trial proceeded on the generic’s three validity attacks—derivation, anticipation, and obviousness—which were all rejected by the presiding judge. Finally, in response to the generic’s appeal of the district court’s decision, the Federal Circuit further considered and expressly rejected the generic’s validity attacks. The Federal Circuit’s affirmance of the district court’s ruling thus confirms Cumberland’s patent protection for ten years.

Cumberland Pharmaceuticals v. Mylan Institutional, LLC, 16-1155, -1259, Fed. Cir., Judges Moore, Reyna, Taranto

Cumberland Pharmaceuticals v. Mylan Institutional, LLC, 1:12-cv-03846, N.D. Ill., Judge Pallmeyer

Related Professionals

Laura P. Masurovsky
Partner
Washington, DC
+1 202 408 4043
Email
Mark J. Feldstein, Ph.D.
Partner
Washington, DC
+1 202 408 4092
Email
John M. Williamson
Partner
Washington, DC
+1 202 408 4282
Email
Danielle A. Duszczyszyn, Ph.D.
Partner
Washington, DC
+1 202 408 4142
Email

Related Practices

Appeals, Issues, and Legal Strategy

Federal Circuit and Supreme Court Appeals

Global IP Enforcement, Litigation, and Trials

Branded Hatch-Waxman (ANDA) Litigation and Trials

Arbitration and Other ADR

Related Industries

Life Sciences

Pharmaceutical

Related Experiences

The Hillman Group, Inc. v. KeyMe, LLC

The Hillman Group, Inc.

Bright Data Ltd. v. NetNut Ltd.

NetNut Ltd.

CMC Materials, LLC v. Dupont de Nemours, Inc. et al.

Dupont de Nemours, Inc. et al.

Daedalus Blue LLC v. SZ DJI Technology Co., Ltd. et al.

SZ DJI Technology Co., Ltd. et al.

Delta Faucet Company v. Globe Union Industrial Corp. et al.

Globe Union Industrial Corp.

Regenxbio, Inc. et al. v. Sarepta Therapeutics, Inc. et al.

Sarepta Therapeutics, Inc. et al.

Eureka Database Solutions, LLC v. Nexidia, Inc.

Nexidia, Inc.

Guntert & Zimmerman Const. Div., Inc. v. GOMACO Corporation

GOMACO Corporation

Hawk Technology Systems, LLC v. Kirkland's Inc.

Kirkland's Inc.

Due to international data regulations, we’ve updated our privacy policy. Click here to read our privacy policy in full.

  • Privacy
  • Disclaimer
  • Legal Notices
  • Fraud Alert
  • EEO Statement
  • Cookies
  • Contact Us

© 2026 Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP