Court order restrains sale and distribution of generic atorvastatin
The order states that until a further hearing scheduled for July 11, the three companies must not advertise, offer for sale, sell or supply atorvastatin, other than that supplied by Pfizer or that agreed in orders placed before the injunction was issued.
Teva launched its own atorvastatin on Monday, June 20, but Pfizer said that "any distribution or sale in the UK" of generic atorvastatin was "unauthorised" and that it would "take appropriate legal action to prevent the violation of its valid patent rights".
However, Teva said it was "disappointed" that Pfizer had used the courts to prevent customers receiving further stocks.
"Our view is that the patent protection in place for Lipitor is invalid; and we intend to win the case and resume supply as soon as possible," a Teva spokesperson added.
The court order issued on Monday, June 20 does not specifically mention pharmacies, but the NPA said it was advising members to "think carefully" about the risks of being caught up in a patent dispute.
Pfizer said it would "vigorously pursue all appropriate legal remedies to prevent infringement of its valid intellectual property rights and reserves the right to claim damages from any infringing party".
Pfizer said in a statement: "The patent at issue is covered by a supplementary protection certificate (SPC) that does not expire until November 2011, and Pfizer has applied for a six-month paediatric extension to the SPC.
"In 2005, the same court had rejected a challenge to the patent by Ranbaxy, finding that a generic atorvastatin product would infringe Pfizer's patent covering atorvastatin, the active ingredient in Lipitor. That decision was affirmed on appeal."
AAH and Phoenix Healthcare both confirmed that restrictions on the distribution of generic atorvastatin had been put place.
Please note You must be a registered user of Chemist+Druggist and logged in to add comments. Opinions expressed here are those of the writers and do not necessarily reflect those of Chemist+Druggist. Comments are considered in the public domain and may be used in future Chemist+Druggist coverage. We accept no responsibility, legal or otherwise, for the accuracy or the content of member comments.
