Last week, the Federal Circuit denied Sandoz’s petition for an en banc rehearing of its precedential July 1st panel decision upholding two of Immunex’s patents covering Enbrel®.

As explained in the petition, Immunex was the first to make etanercept, the tumor necrosis factor (TNF) receptor fusion protein that is the active ingredient in Enbrel® (used

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

In a recent precedential opinion[1], the Federal Circuit rejected arguments by Amgen that a single step purification process used by Sandoz for its G-CSF biosimilar infringed claims of Amgen’s patent describing a multistep purification procedure for proteins expressed in a non-mammalian system.

In this case, the Federal Circuit explained that the doctrine of

On April 25, 2019, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (“FDA”) approved new biosimilar product EticovoTM (etanercept-ykro) by Samsung Bioepis.  Eticovo is a biosimilar to Enbrel® (etanercept), which is marketed by Amgen, Inc. (“Amgen”).  Like Enbrel, Eticovo was approved across five eligible indications for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis, ankylosing spondylitis, plaque psoriasis, psoriatic

On February 21, 2019, Sandoz Inc. (“Sandoz”) filed suit against Amgen Inc. and Amgen Manufacturing Limited (collectively “Amgen”) seeking declaratory judgment of non-infringement and invalidity of Amgen’s U.S. Patent No. 9,643,997 (“the ʼ997 patent”). The ʼ997 patent is directed to methods of purifying a protein expressed in a non-native limited solubility form in a non-mammalian

On August 10, 2018, AbbVie, Inc. and AbbVie Biotechnology Ltd. (collectively “AbbVie”) sued Sandoz Inc., Sandoz GMBH, and Sandoz International GMBH (collectively “Sandoz”) in the district of New Jersey alleging infringement of two patents related to Humira®:  U.S. Patent 9,187,559 (“the ʼ559 patent”) and U.S. Patent No. 9,750,808 (“the ʼ808 patent”).

According to the complaint

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

Earlier this month, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB” or “the Board”) denied institution of Sandoz’s petition for inter partes review of Abbvie’s patent, U.S. Patent No. 9,512,216 (“the ’216 patent”), directed to methods for treating moderate to severe chronic plaque psoriasis with a human anti-tumor necrosis factor α (TNFα) antibody.[1] The petition,

Sandoz announced last week that the FDA issued a complete response letter for its proposed biosimilar to rituximab.  In the announcement, Sandoz stated that it “stands behind the robust body of evidence included in the regulatory submission and is currently evaluating the content of the letter.”  Sandoz further indicated that although disappointed, it “remains committed