On January 4, 2022, the District Court for the District of Delaware granted Hikma Pharmaceuticals USA Inc.’s (“Hikma”) motion to dismiss Amarin Pharma Inc.’s (“Amarin”) infringement claims, finding that Hikma’s “skinny label” for its generic heart drug, icosapent ethyl, did not induce infringement of Amarin’s three patents. This decision comes on the heels of the
On February 23, 2021, a Federal Circuit panel of Chief Judge Prost, Judge Newman, and Judge Moore reheard oral argument in GlaxoSmithKline LLC v. Teva Pharms. USA, Inc. As discussed in our previous post, on February 9, 2021, the panel issued an order granting Teva’s petition for rehearing, vacating the prior October 2,
Recently, the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals dismissed Pfizer Inc.’s (“Pfizer”) appeal for lack of Article III standing. Pfizer had filed an inter partes review (“IPR”) against Chugai Pharmaceutical Co. (“Chugai”) arguing that U.S. Patent Nos. 7,332,289 and 7,927,815 (“the patents-at-issue”) were unpatentable. The patents at issue are directed towards methods of manufacturing rituximab. Specifically,
The European Medicines Agency’s Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use (CHMP) held its monthly meeting on March 23-26, 2020. During the meeting, the CHMP reported important updates on the status of the approval process for biosimilars relating to etanercept and rituximab.
At the meeting, the CHMP adopted a positive opinion that recommended
On January 15, 2020, Hospira filed a petition for rehearing en banc asking the full Federal Circuit to reconsider a prior panel’s analysis of the Safe Harbor provision and reverse the finding of infringement. In December 2019, the Federal Circuit affirmed the District of Delaware’s decision denying Hospira’s motion for judgment as a matter of
As we previously reported, earlier this year the Federal Circuit affirmed a district court’s finding that Sandoz’s ZARXIO filgrastim biosimilar and proposed pegfilgrastim biosimilar do not infringe Amgen’s patents. The patents-at-issue were Amgen’s U.S. Patent Nos. 8,940,878 (“the ’878 patent”) and 6,162,427 (“the ’427 patent”). The ’872 patent is directed towards methods of purifying
On May 20, 2019, the PTAB denied a request for rehearing in Apotex Inc. v. Amgen Inc., Case IPR2016-01542 (Paper 67), but modified its Final Written Decision. In the Final Written Decision, the PTAB found claims 1-17 and 19-24 of U.S. Patent No. 8,952,138 (“the ’138 patent”) unpatentable. The ’138 patent is directed towards
Recently, in Adello Biologics LLC v. Amgen Inc., Case PGR2019-00001 (Paper No. 13) (PTAB Apr. 19, 2019), the PTAB instituted post-grant review of claims 1-30 of U.S. Patent No. 9,856,287 (“the ’287 patent”). The ’287 patent is the patent at issue in a pending litigation between Amgen and Apotex under the Biologics Price Competition
On June 14, 2018, Senator Orrin Hatch of Utah, the co-author of the Hatch-Waxman Act, filed an amendment to the Hatch-Waxman Act in an effort to further incentivize generic drug development. The language of the amendment, known as the Hatch-Waxman Integrity Act of 2018, states that its purpose is “to prevent the inter partes review
The Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”) recently denied Sandoz’s petition for inter partes review (“IPR”) of claims 1-30 of AbbVie’s patent, U.S. Patent No. 9,187,559 (“the ’559 patent”). The ’559 patent is directed towards a multiple-variable dose regimen for treating idiopathic inflammatory bowel disease. The patent discloses administering a high dose of a TNFα