Bloomberg Anywhere Remote Login Bloomberg Terminal Demo Request


Connecting decision makers to a dynamic network of information, people and ideas, Bloomberg quickly and accurately delivers business and financial information, news and insight around the world.


Financial Products

Enterprise Products


Customer Support

  • Americas

    +1 212 318 2000

  • Europe, Middle East, & Africa

    +44 20 7330 7500

  • Asia Pacific

    +65 6212 1000


Industry Products

Media Services

Follow Us

Bloomberg Customers

Lilly Loses Patent Dispute With Actavis Over Cancer Treatment

Eli Lilly & Co. lost a U.K. lawsuit over its Alimta cancer treatment when a judge ruled that a generic version planned by Actavis Plc doesn’t breach European patents.

Judge Richard Arnold in London rejected Lilly’s argument that Actavis’s planned pemetrexed disodium product infringed patents registered in the U.K., France, Italy and Spain. Lilly said it would appeal the ruling, part of which relates to the use of vitamins.

Lilly, which had first quarter sales of $632 million from Alimta this year, has fought lawsuits across the globe to protect patents related to the product. In March, a U.S. District Court upheld a patent regarding vitamin dosage in a dispute with Teva Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd.

“The significant scientific research that Lilly performed in support of those vitamin dosage regimen patents deserves intellectual property protection,” Michael J. Harrington, Indianapolis-based Lilly’s general counsel, said in an e-mailed statement. “We plan to seek permission to appeal this ruling.”

Some European patents for Alimta expire in December 2015 and Actavis is seeking regulatory approval for a rival treatment, according to a written decision by Judge Arnold handed down in London today.

Lilly said in its statement that it had won an Alimta patent case in Germany earlier this year. The company said it expected European patents related to vitamin dosage to remain in force until 2021.

Actavis said the ruling was the first time an English High Court had ruled in a case involving foreign designations of a European patent.

Please upgrade your Browser

Your browser is out-of-date. Please download one of these excellent browsers:

Chrome, Firefox, Safari, Opera or Internet Explorer.