in the united states district court for the western...

ACTIVE/102581507.4

-1-

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN

TEVA RESPIRATORY, LLC, and TEVA

PHARMACEUTICALS USA, INC.,

)

)

)

)

)

) Civil Action No. 20-00207

Plaintiffs, )

)

v. )

)

PERRIGO PHARMACEUTICALS CO., and

PERRIGO COMPANY PLC,

)

)

)

Defendants. )

)

)

COMPLAINT

Plaintiffs Teva Respiratory, LLC (“Teva Respiratory”) and Teva Pharmaceuticals USA,

Inc. (“Teva USA”) (collectively, “Plaintiffs” or “Teva”), allege against defendants Perrigo

Pharmaceuticals Co., and Perrigo Company plc (collectively, “Defendants” or “Perrigo”) as

follows:

INTRODUCTION

1. This case arises from Perrigo’s deliberate and unlawful attempt to misappropriate

Teva’s federally registered trade dress for Teva’s revolutionary ProAir RespiClick® rescue

respiratory inhaler and usurp and tarnish Teva’s goodwill.

2. Teva’s ProAir RespiClick® is the only albuterol rescue inhaler on the market that

is “breath-activated”; it does not require any hand-breath coordination during inhalation. In other

words, Teva’s ProAir RespiClick® enables users to get a rescue dose of albuterol during an asthma

or COPD attack simply by breathing in. ProAir RespiClick® is a leading drug for the treatment of

bronchospasm.

Case 1:20-cv-00207 ECF No. 1 filed 03/09/20 PageID.1 of 21

ACTIVE/102581507.4

-2-

3. Teva’s ProAir RespiClick® design includes a white body and a distinctive red cap.

Teva has a federally registered trademark on the ProAir RespiClick® design.

4. Teva also sells an earlier-generation albuterol rescue inhaler named ProAir® HFA,

both as a branded product and as an authorized generic product. ProAir® HFA is a standard

metered-dose inhaler (“MDI”). MDI systems use a pressurized canister that when activated will

deliver consistent and accurate doses of aerosolized medication to the user. In order to receive a

rescue dose of albuterol, ProAir® HFA users must simultaneously press down on an activation

button and inhale

5. Teva’s ProAir® HFA design includes a red body with a white cap. Teva has a

federally registered trademark on the ProAir® HFA design.

6. Teva has consistently used red and white trade dress for its albuterol rescue

inhalers, but has distinctive uses of those colors and designs as between ProAir® HFA and ProAir

RespiClick®. In particular, ProAir RespiClick® has a distinctive red cap and white body which, as

detailed below, Teva emphasizes when instructing patients how to use ProAir RespiClick®.

7. On February 24, 2020, Perrigo received approval to launch a generic version of

Teva’s first-generation ProAir® HFA albuterol sulfate inhaler (“the Perrigo HFA”).

8. While ProAir® HFA is the reference product for the Perrigo HFA – meaning that

the Perrigo HFA does not have the next-generation breath-activated technology of Teva’s ProAir

RespiClick® – the Perrigo HFA intentionally copies the trade dress of ProAir RespiClick®,

including ProAir RespiClick®’s white body and distinctive red cap.

9. Perrigo’s infringement is doubly harmful. Not only does Perrigo copy the red and

white color scheme used in all of Teva’s albuterol inhalers, Perrigo’s generic HFA rescue inhaler

specifically copies the trade dress of ProAir RespiClick® including its distinctive red cap. But the


ACTIVE/102581507.4

-3-

Perrigo HFA does not incorporate the next-generation breath-activation technology of ProAir

RespiClick®. By mimicking the next-generation ProAir RespiClick®, the Perrigo HFA therefore

poses particular dangers to patients who will be confused about the operation of their rescue inhaler

in the midst of an asthma or COPD attack.

10. On information and belief, patients are likely to be confused in the midst of an

emergency and think that they can receive albuterol from the Perrigo HFA simply by breathing in,

when in reality they will not receive any medication unless they coordinate inhaling at the same

time that they depress an activation button. This confusion caused by the Perrigo HFA is likely to

lead to patients failing to receive rescue doses of albuterol without realizing they are not receiving

the medication that they need. That in turn is likely to cause significant harm to patients. It is also

likely to cause significant harm to the reputation and goodwill of Teva.

11. Perrigo’s unlawful conduct constitutes trademark infringement, unfair competition,

and false and misleading advertising under the federal Lanham Act and Michigan state law.

THE PARTIES

12. Plaintiff Teva Respiratory, LLC is a Florida limited liability company with its

principal place of business at 400 Interpace Parkway, Building A, Parsippany, New Jersey 07054.

13. Plaintiff Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc. is a Delaware corporation with its

principal place of business at 400 Interpace Parkway, Building A, Parsippany, New Jersey 07054.

14. On information and belief, defendant Perrigo Pharmaceuticals Co. is a Michigan

Corporation with its principal place of business at 515 Eastern Avenue, Allegan, Michigan 49010.

15. On information and belief, defendant Perrigo Company plc is a company organized

under the laws of Ireland. On information and belief, it does not have any places of business in

the United States.


ACTIVE/102581507.4

-4-

JURISDICTION AND VENUE

16. This Court has subject matter jurisdiction over the federal claims under 15 U.S.C.

§ 1121 (Lanham Act), 28 U.S.C. § 1331 (federal question), 28 U.S.C. § 1332 (diversity), and over

the state law claims under 28 U.S.C. § 1367 (supplemental jurisdiction). There is complete

diversity of citizenship of the parties and the amount in controversy exceeds $75,000.

17. The Court has personal jurisdiction over Perrigo Pharmaceuticals Co. because, on

information and belief, Perrigo Pharmaceuticals Co. is a Michigan corporation with a principal

place of business in Allegan, Michigan.

18. The Court has personal jurisdiction over Perrigo Company plc under Federal Rule

of Civil Procedure 4(k)(2). Plaintiffs’ claims arise under federal law, and Perrigo Company plc is

a foreign defendant not subject to general personal jurisdiction in the courts of any state; Perrigo

Company plc has sufficient contacts with the United States as a whole, including, but not limited

to, by purposefully placing its infringing products in U.S. commerce.

19. Venue is proper in this District pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1391 because a substantial

part of the events giving rise to the claim occurred in this judicial district, a substantial part of the

property that is the subject of this action is situated in this judicial district, and because Defendants

are subject to personal jurisdiction in this district.

BACKGROUND

I. TEVA’S PROAIR RESCUE INHALERS

20. Teva markets and sells two quick-relief, or “rescue,” respiratory inhalers in the

United States.

21. Designed to treat sudden and acute respiratory symptoms, rescue inhalers are

specifically designed to deliver short-acting medications such as albuterol to a user’s lungs,


ACTIVE/102581507.4

-5-

quickly reducing inflammation and opening that user’s airways. In contrast, maintenance inhalers

are designed to be used consistently even when symptoms are not present, so as to limit chronic

inflammation and prevent acute flare-ups.

22. Teva uses and advertises a red and white color scheme for its albuterol rescue

inhalers, but distinguishes between its two products by using different design elements. The

ProAir® HFA has a red body with a white cap, and the ProAir RespiClick® has a white body with

a distinctive red cap.

23. Teva’s first rescue inhaler product was the ProAir® HFA, a standard metered-dose

inhaler (“MDI”). MDI systems use a pressurized canister that when activated will deliver

consistent and accurate doses of aerosolized medication to the user. Teva also produces and

markets an authorized generic version of the ProAir® HFA, a device which is produced by the

same production facility as, and is otherwise functionally identical to the branded version.

24. To operate an MDI, a patient is required to simultaneously press down on an

activation button and inhale. If the user does not inhale at the same time the activation button is

depressed, the medication will often be released into the mouth and upper throat, as opposed to the

lungs, rendering the dose ineffective.

25. Teva’s next-generation rescue inhaler, ProAir RespiClick®, is the only albuterol

rescue inhaler on the market that requires no hand-breath coordination during inhalation. Where

a standard MDI requires a user to push down on a button and inhale simultaneously, the act of

inhaling alone activates ProAir RespiClick®, consistently delivering needed medicine to the lungs.

26. The ProAir RespiClick® system does not require washing, priming, or shaking,

while ProAir® HFA and other MDI products do. Priming ensures that the inhaler will deliver a

correct dose of medication and requires that a user take the cap off the mouthpiece and shake the


ACTIVE/102581507.4

-6-

inhaler, then spray it away from their face to finish priming it. The priming process must be

completed before the first use and again if the inhaler has not been used in more than 14 days.

27. By contrast, to operate ProAir RespiClick®, a user must only (1) open the cap; (2)

inhale by breathing in deeply through their mouth; and (3) the user must close the cap after

inhalation.

28. This next-generation “Open-Inhale-Close” technology – found only in ProAir

RespiClick® – provides unique benefits especially for those patients who have difficulty activating

an MDI device while simultaneously inhaling, such as pediatric users, elderly users, and users with

disabilities.

29. ProAir RespiClick® is indicated for patients 4 years of age and older for treatment

or prevention of bronchospasm with reversible obstructive airway disease and for the prevention

of exercise-induced bronchospasm.

30. The features of ProAir RespiClick® that eliminate the need for hand-breath

coordination and therefore simplify administration are particularly beneficial for patient

populations that need ease of administration in emergency situations, such as children, and

disabled or elderly populations. Ex. A, https://www.oindpnews.com/2016/04/fda-approves-

proair-respiclick-for-pediatric-use/.

II. THE IMPORTANCE OF DISTINGUISHABLE INHALER TRADE DRESS

31. On information and belief, for users of respiratory inhalers, the design and coloring

of the wide variety of available respiratory inhaler products carries significant meaning to users

concerning the source and type of the inhaler. In fact, being able to easily distinguish between the

different types of asthma drugs and inhalers based on the inhaler color and design may be a matter

of life and death for patients.


ACTIVE/102581507.4

-7-

32. Of the inhalers on the market, each has a distinct color scheme and design that is

chosen by the product manufacturer. See, e.g., https://www.urmc.rochester.edu/MediaLibraries/

URMCMedia/childrens-hospital/pulmonology/documents/AsthmaInhaler.pdf (showing chart of

inhalers). On information and belief, given the substantial differences in the types of inhalers

available, both in terms of short-acting versus long-acting, and in terms of the medications and

propellants used, it is critical that healthcare providers, patients and their caregivers are able to

quickly distinguish and navigate the landscape of existing products to ensure that they are

prescribing and/or using the correct medication. Indeed, the issue of “inhaler confusion” is well

known in the art and of specific concern to clinicians.

33. On information and belief, the phenomenon of “inhaler confusion” is particularly

harmful where a patient’s confusion leads them to believe that they are receiving appropriate

medication, but as a result of confusion and resulting misuse of an inhaler, they are not.

34. On information and belief, healthcare providers, patients, and the caregivers of

patients often rely on the color schemes and designs to distinguish inhalers. Ex. B,

https://asthma.net/living/the-color-of-inhalers-part-1/.

35. The ProAir RespiClick® trade dress is a red and white color scheme in which the

inhaler body is white with a red cap. The ProAir RespiClick® trade dress is displayed on Teva

Respiratory’s website at http://www.proair.com/, and can be seen in the image below:


ACTIVE/102581507.4

-8-

36. Teva has expended substantial resources advertising the ProAir RespiClick® and

displaying its distinctive trade dress, and as a result has built significant goodwill and secondary

meaning in that brand.

37. Neither the red and white color combination of the ProAir RespiClick® nor the use

of the red color on the device’s cap is functional. There are a large variety of alternative colors

used in the market for other inhaler products and the association of the red and white trade dress

with the ProAir RespiClick® is the result of Plaintiff’s advertising and educational efforts.

38. Critically, Teva specifically instructs patients how to use ProAir RespiClick® by

referencing the red cap. The following instructions appear in the packaging of the ProAir

RespiClick® and in the instructional materials that Teva provides to healthcare providers and

pharmacists concerning ProAir RespiClick®.


ACTIVE/102581507.4

-9-

39. Teva relies on the red cap to teach patients how to use ProAir RespiClick® properly,

including by telling patients: “The red cap on your inhaler is used to load a dose;” and “Important:

always close the red cap to reload your next dose.” (emphasis original); see also Ex. C, ProAir

RespiClick® Instructions for Use, available at https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/drugsatfda_docs/

label/2016/205636s006lbl.pdf (featuring red cap in instructions for use).

40. The ProAir RespiClick® trade dress is federally protected under trademark

Registration No. 5461616, which was registered on May 8, 2018. Ex. D.

41. For reference, the trade dress of the ProAir® HFA is the inverse of the RespiClick®

system – that is, a red body with a white cap. The trade dress of the two Teva ProAir rescue

inhalers is shown in the images below:


ACTIVE/102581507.4

-10-

42. On information and belief, in the category of short-acting or rescue inhalers, users

and medical professionals strongly associate the ProAir RespiClick® system with having a white

body with a red cap. These colors are clearly distinguished against other rescue inhalers on the

market such as the Proventil HFA, which is yellow with an orange cap, and Ventolin HFA, which

is blue with a dark blue cap. Ex. B.

43. On information and belief, the trade dress of ProAir RespiClick® – with its unique

red cap and white body – is distinct from any other rescue inhaler on the market, and therefore

distinguishes it as the only rescue inhaler that eliminates the need for hand-breath coordination.

III. PERRIGO’S UNLAWFUL ACTIONS

44. Perrigo notified Teva on or about July 3, 2013 that it had filed Abbreviated New

Drug Application (“ANDA”) No. 203760 with the FDA pursuant to 21 U.S.C. § 355(j) to obtain

approval to market and sell a generic version of Teva’s ProAir® HFA. Following receipt of

Perrigo’s notice letter, Teva filed a lawsuit asserting claims of patent infringement under 35 U.S.C.

§ 271(e)(2)(A) in the United States District Court for the District of Delaware on August 16, 2013.

See Teva Branded Pharm. Prods. R&D, Inc. v. Perrigo Pharm. Co., C.A. No. 1:13-cv-01441-

GMS. Perrigo ultimately conceded infringement and the parties settled the litigation.

45. Perrigo has not been granted any license to any Teva trademark or trade dress for

its respiratory inhalers, including trademarks or trade dress of either ProAir® HFA or ProAir

RespiClick®.

46. Perrigo has not been granted any license to the unique patented features of the

ProAir RespiClick® system, including its unique breath-activation technology.

47. Perrigo announced on February 25, 2020 that it had received approval from the

Food and Drug Administration for its generic version of Teva’s ProAir® HFA and that it was


ACTIVE/102581507.4

-11-

immediately launching the generic product with limited commercial quantities. Ex. E,

https://www.perrigo.com/press-release/perrigo-and-catalent-announce-fda-approval-perrigos-ab-

rated-generic-version-proairr (Feb. 25, 2020).

48. Perrigo’s generic version of ProAir® HFA improperly infringes and

misappropriates the trade dress of ProAir RespiClick®.

49. The Perrigo HFA inhaler has a white body with a red cap, a trade dress that is

identical to Teva’s federally protected trade dress for its ProAir RespiClick® system.

50. For comparison purposes, in the image depicted below, the ProAir RespiClick® is

on the left and Perrigo’s generic ProAir® HFA is on the right:

51. Perrigo could have chosen from a large range of colors and color combinations for

the Perrigo HFA inhaler

52. On information and belief, Perrigo’s misappropriation of Teva’s trade dress by

using the exact color design of the ProAir RespiClick® system was deliberate and willful.


ACTIVE/102581507.4

-12-

53. On information and belief, given the extent to which trade dress for both ProAir®

HFA and ProAir RespiClick® was well-known amongst respiratory medical professionals and

users, there can be no question that Perrigo was fully aware of the fact that an inhaler with a white

body and red cap was necessarily associated with the ProAir RespiClick®.

54. Perrigo was on notice of the Teva’s rights in the trade dress of the ProAir

RespiClick® due to Teva Respiratory’s federal trademark registration with the USPTO, which has

been available publicly as an application since October 1, 2015 and was registered by the USPTO

on May 8, 2018. See Ex. D (Registration No. 5461616.)

55. On information and belief, by choosing the identical color scheme for their Perrigo

HFA system that is used for the ProAir RespiClick® system, Perrigo intentionally sought to benefit

from the goodwill and patient benefits associated with the next-generation ProAir RespiClick®.

56. On information and belief, Perrigo’s actions are particularly dangerous because the

Perrigo HFA is likely to cause confusion among consumers, which in turn will cause harm to the

public because the Perrigo HFA is does not have the next-generation breath-activation technology

of the ProAir RespiClick®.

57. On information and belief, Perrigo’s actions in copying Teva’s trade dress will

cause confusion as to which inhaler a patient has actually received. It is critical that patients who

rely on their prescription medication are prescribed and dispensed the correct medication without

risk of confusion, particularly given that a number of users of the ProAir RespiClick® system are

children, disabled populations, and elderly populations who rely on the simplified functionality for

administration of their medication during life-threatening situations.


ACTIVE/102581507.4

-13-

58. On information and belief, as a generic albuterol rescue inhaler, the Perrigo HFA

is likely to be substituted for ProAir RespiClick® on pharmaceutical formularies, and at

pharmacies, and provided to users who were prescribed ProAir RespiClick®.

59. On information and belief, the Perrigo HFA does not incorporate any of the unique

features of the ProAir RespiClick® system allowing for “Open-Inhale-Close” use.

60. On information and belief, if a patient is dispensed the incorrect medical device

which does not operate in the way they expect, it will cause harm to vulnerable patient populations,

including children, disabled populations, and elderly populations.

61. On information and belief, the medical risks to patients who confuse the Perrigo

HFA product for the ProAir RespiClick® product are likely to be particularly severe. Those

patients are likely, in an emergency situation in which they need medication from a rescue inhaler,

not only fail to receive the necessary medication, but also fail to realize that they have not received

their medication. As detailed in the label of the ProAir RespiClick® the device delivers albuterol

via a “very fine powder that the user may or may not taste or feel.” Ex. C. Accordingly, the

instructions for the ProAir RespiClick® instruct patients: “Do not take extra dose from the inhaler

even if they do not taste or feel the medicine.” Id. (emphasis original). If a patient mistakes the

similar looking Perrigo HFA for ProAir RespiClick® and uses the Perrigo HFA in an emergency

situation as they would use ProAir RespiClick® – by simply breathing in – the Perrigo HFA will

not deliver any medication, and the user will have no reason to think that is out of the ordinary,

given that users often do not taste or feel the albuterol dispensed by ProAir RespiClick®.

62. On information and belief, confusion between the trade dress of ProAir

RespiClick® and the Perrigo HFA will cause consumers physical harm which in turn will tarnish

the goodwill associated with the ProAir RespiClick® system.


ACTIVE/102581507.4

-14-

63. On information and belief, a patient using the Perrigo HFA system with the

incorrect belief that it is the ProAir RespiClick® will come to the mistaken belief that the ProAir

RespiClick® does not function properly or is an ineffective product.

64. On information and belief, Perrigo’s unlawful actions will continue to cause

irreparable harm to Teva, including without limitation, by causing confusion in the marketplace;

putting at risk and harming the health and wellbeing of Teva’s patients, especially among the

vulnerable patient populations of children, and disabled and elderly patients; diminishing the

reputation and goodwill associated with the ProAir RespiClick® brand and its trade dress; and

causing permanent loss of sales and market share of Teva.

COUNT I: FEDERAL TRADEMARK/TRADE DRESS INFRINGEMENT UNDER 15 U.S.C. § 1114(1)

65. Teva realleges and incorporates by reference the allegations in the preceding

paragraphs as though fully stated herein.

66. Teva Respiratory owns the design as used on the ProAir RespiClick® system, which

is registered with the United States Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO”). See Ex. D.

67. Perrigo’s generic version of the ProAir® HFA inhaler is confusingly similar to

Teva’s ProAir RespiClick® in appearance.

68. Perrigo’s generic version of the ProAir® HFA inhaler is likely to cause confusion

among consumers with Teva’s ProAir RespiClick®, or to deceive as to source, affiliation or

sponsorship with Teva, in violation of the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1114.

69. Teva has been and/or is likely to be damaged by Perrigo’s infringement in an

amount to be determined at trial.


ACTIVE/102581507.4

-15-

70. Perrigo’s acts have been committed with the knowledge of Teva’s exclusive rights

and goodwill in the design elements of the ProAir RespiClick®, and Perrigo’s conduct is willful,

deliberate, intentional, and/or in bad faith, making this an exceptional case.

71. As a result of Perrigo’s trademark infringement, Perrigo has caused, and will

continue to cause, irreparable harm to Teva and the goodwill associated with the ProAir

RespiClick®, for which Teva has no adequate remedy at law. Teva is entitled, inter alia, to

preliminary and permanent injunctive relief.

COUNT II: FEDERAL UNFAIR COMPETITION UNDER 15 U.S.C. § 1125(A)



73. Teva has common law and federal trademark rights in the design of the ProAir

RespiClick®, which is uniquely associated with Teva as a source of goods and services offered in

connection with the ProAir RespiClick®.


Teva’s ProAir RespiClick® in appearance and constitutes unfair competition.



sponsorship with Teva, in violation of the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1125(a).







ACTIVE/102581507.4

-16-





COUNT III: FEDERAL FALSE AND MISLEADING ADVERTISING UNDER 15 U.S.C. §

1125(A)(1)(B)



80. The design of Perrigo’s HFA inhaler confusingly similar to Teva’s ProAir

RespiClick® in appearance and constitutes unfair competition.

81. By adopting a design confusingly similar to Teva’s ProAir RespiClick®, Perrigo

intentionally and falsely misrepresented to potential customers that the Perrigo HFA inhaler is

likely to provide the same unique activation-free use as Teva’s ProAir RespiClick®, in violation

of the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1125(a).

82. Teva has been and/or is likely to be damaged by Perrigo’s false and misleading

advertising in an amount to be determined at trial.

83. As a result of Perrigo’s false and misleading advertising, Perrigo has caused, and

will continue to cause, irreparable harm to Teva and the goodwill associated with the ProAir



COUNT IV: TRADEMARK/ TRADE DRESS INFRINGEMENT UNDER MICHIGAN COMMON LAW




ACTIVE/102581507.4

-17-

85. Teva Respiratory owns the design as used on the ProAir RespiClick® system, which

is registered with the USPTO. See Ex. D.





sponsorship with Teva.










COUNT V: UNFAIR COMPETITION UNDER THE MICHIGAN CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT, §

445.903(1)(a)



92. Teva has common law and federal trademark rights in the design elements of the

ProAir RespiClick®, which are uniquely associated with Teva as a source of goods and services

offered in connection with the ProAir RespiClick®.


ACTIVE/102581507.4

-18-




among consumers with Teva’s ProAir RespiClick®, or to mislead consumers as to source,

sponsorship, approval, or certification of goods or services, in violation of the Michigan Consumer

Protection Act, § 445.903(1)(a).










COUNT VI: FALSE AND MISLEADING ADVERTISING UNDER THE MICHIGAN CONSUMER

PROTECTION ACT, § 445.903(1)(a)



99. The design of Perrigo’s HFA inhaler is confusingly similar to Teva’s ProAir

RespiClick® in appearance and constitutes unfair competition.

100. By adopting a design confusingly similar to Teva’s ProAir RespiClick®, Perrigo

intentionally and falsely misrepresented to potential customers that the Perrigo HFA inhaler is


ACTIVE/102581507.4

-19-

likely to provide the same unique activation-free use as Teva’s ProAir RespiClick®, in violation

of the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1125(a).

101. Teva has been and/or is likely to be damaged by Perrigo’s false and misleading

advertising in an amount to be determined at trial.

102. As a result of Perrigo’s false and misleading advertising, Perrigo has caused, and

will continue to cause, irreparable harm to Teva and the goodwill associated with the ProAir



PRAYER FOR RELIEF

WHEREFORE, Teva respectfully requests that this Court enter judgment in its favor and

against Defendants on each of the above referenced claims and caused of action as follows:

A. Preliminary and permanent injunctions requiring Defendants and all those acting in

concert or participation with each of them to the full extent of Fed. R. Civ. P. 65 be

preliminarily and permanently enjoined and restrained form directly or indirectly

using, in any manner or in any medium, the ProAir RespiClick® trade dress, or

otherwise engaging in any further acts of trademark infringement or unfair

competition against Teva, or aiding, abetting, encouraging, or inducing another to

do any of the acts herein enjoined;

B. Preliminary and permanent injunctions requiring Defendants and all those acting in

concert or participation with each of them to the full extent of Fed. R. Civ. P. 65

take affirmative steps to prevent any additional confusion that may be created by

its unlawful activities, including, but not limited to, recalling from U.S. commerce

all products, packaging, labels, advertisements, promotional materials,


ACTIVE/102581507.4

-20-

publications, broadcasts, or any other media that use the ProAir RespiClick® trade

dress.

C. That Defendants file with the Court and serve on counsel for Teva within thirty (30)

days after entry of any injunction issued by the Court in this action, a sworn written

statement pursuant to 15 U.S.C. § 1116(a) setting forth in detail the manner and

form in which each of them has complied with any injunction which the Court may

enter in this action;

D. Finding that this is an exceptional case within the meaning of 15 U.S.C. § 1117;

E. Awarding actual damages and treble damages;

F. Ordering an accounting and disgorgement of Defendants’ profits;

G. Awarding punitive and exemplary damages;

H. Awarding the costs and expenses of this litigation and these proceedings to Teva;

I. Awarding reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs to Teva as provided by law;

J. Awarding pre-judgment and post-judgment interest to Teva; and

K. Granting to Teva all other relief as the Court deems just and proper.

JURY DEMAND

Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 38(b), Plaintiffs demand a trial by jury on all

issues triable by jury.

Dated: March 9, 2020

OF COUNSEL:

Robert D. Carroll

Todd Marabella

GOODWIN PROCTER LLP

100 Northern Avenue

Boston, MA 02210

Tel.: (617) 570-1000

By: /s/ Rebecca Cantor

Linda Dupont Mettes

Rebecca Cantor

Brooks Kushman

1000 Town Center

22nd Floor

Southfield, MI 48075

Tel.: 248-358-4400

Fax: 248-358-3351


ACTIVE/102581507.4

-21-

David M. Hashmall

GOODWIN PROCTER LLP

The New York Times Building

620 Eighth Avenue

New York, NY 10018

Tel.: (212) 813-8800

[email protected] [email protected]

Attorneys for Teva Respiratory, LLC,

and Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc.


in the united states district court for the western...

Documents