About the PTAB Life Sciences Report: Each month we will report on developments at the PTAB involving life sciences patents.
Reckitt Benckiser LLC v. Ansell Healthcare Products LLC
PTAB Petition: IPR2017-00063; filed October 12, 2016.
PTAB Trial Instituted; entered February 1, 2017.
Patent at Issue: U.S. Patent No. 9,074,027 ("Dip-formed synthetic polyisoprene latex articles with improved intraparticle and interparticle crosslinks," issued July 7, 2015) claims a synthetic polyisoprene elastomeric glove or condom made of a layer of elastomer comprising: synthetic polyisoprene particles; inter-polyisoprene particle crosslinks; and intra-polyisoprene particle crosslinks, wherein the intra-polyisoprene particle crosslinks and inter-polyisoprene particle crosslinks are substantially uniformly distributed among and between the synthetic polyisoprene particles.
Petitioners Reckitt Benkiser LLC, Reckitt Benckiser Corporate Services Ltd., Reckitt Benckiser (ENA) B.V., Reckitt Benckiser Group plc, Reckitt Benckiser plc, and SSL Manufacturing (Thailand) Ltd. are challenging the '027 patent on written description issues in the chain of priority under 35 U.S.C. § 112; and also one ground as being anticipated under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b). View the petition here. Administrative Patent Judges Michael J. Fitzpatrick (author), Susan L. C. Mitchell, and Amanda F. Wieker issued a decision instituting inter partes review of claims 1–20 as being anticipated under 35 U.S.C. § 102 by U.S. Patent Application Publication No. US2009/0272384 A1.
Related Matters: According to the petition, the '027 patent is involved in the litigation: Ansell Healthcare Products LLC v. Reckitt Benckiser LLC, C.A. No. 1:15-cv-00915 (D. Del.). The petitioners concurrently filed a petition for inter partes review of U.S. Patent No. 9,074,029 (IPR2017-00066; Petitioner Reckitt Benkiser; filed 10/12/2016; Instituted 02/01/2017; pending).
Reckitt Benckiser LLC v. Ansell Healthcare Products LLC
PTAB Petition: IPR2017-00066; filed October 12, 2016.
PTAB Trial Instituted; entered February 1, 2017.
Patent at Issue: U.S. Patent No. 9,074,029 ("Dip-formed synthetic polyisoprene latex articles with improved intraparticle and interparticle crosslinks," issued July 7, 2015) claims a synthetic, dip-formed polyisoprene elastomeric condom comprising: synthetic polyisoprene particles, said synthetic polyisoprene particles bonded to each other through intra-polyisoprene particle crosslinks and inter-polyisoprene particle crosslinks; wherein the intra-polyisoprene particle crosslinks and the inter-polyisoprene particle crosslinks are such that the molecular weight is less than about 8000 g/mol between the crosslinks.
Petitioners Reckitt Benkiser LLC, Reckitt Benckiser Corporate Services Ltd., Reckitt Benckiser (ENA) B.V., Reckitt Benckiser Group plc, Reckitt Benckiser plc, and SSL Manufacturing (Thailand) Ltd are challenging the '029 patent on written description issues in the chain of priority under 35 U.S.C. § 112; and also one ground as being anticipated under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b). View the petition here. Administrative Patent Judges Michael J. Fitzpatrick (author), Susan L. C. Mitchell, and Amanda F. Wieker issued a decision instituting inter partes review of claims 1–20 as being anticipated under 35 U.S.C. § 102 by U.S. Patent Application Publication No. US2009/027238 A1.
Related Matters: According to the petition, the '029 patent is involved in the litigation: Ansell Healthcare Products LLC v. Reckitt Benckiser LLC, C.A. No. 1:15-cv-00915 (D. Del.). The petitioners concurrently filed a petition for inter partes review of U.S. Patent No. 9,074,027 (IPR2017-00063; Petitioner Reckitt Benkiser; filed 10/12/2016; Instituted 02/01/2017; pending).
Argentum Pharmaceuticals LLC. v. CIPLA Ltd.
PTAB Petition: IPR2017-00807; filed February 2, 2017.
Patent at Issue: U.S. Patent No. 8,168,620 ("Combination of azelastine and steroids," issued May 1, 2012) claims a pharmaceutical formulation comprising: azelastine, or a pharmaceutically acceptable salt thereof, and a pharmaceutically acceptable ester of fluticasone, wherein said pharmaceutical formulation is in a dosage form suitable for nasal administration.
Petitioners Argentum Pharmaceuticals LLC; Intelligent Pharma Research LLC; APS GP LLC; APS GP Investors LLC; and KVK-Tech, Inc. are challenging the '620 patent on three grounds as being anticipated under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) (ground 1) or as obvious under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) (grounds 2 and 3). View the petition here.
Related Matters: According to the petition, the '620 patent is involved in the litigations: Meda Pharms. Inc. v. Apotex Inc., 14-cv-01453 (D. Del.); Meda Pharms. Inc. v. Teva Pharms., 15-cv-00785 (D. Del.); and Meda Pharms. Inc. v. Perrigo UK Finco Ltd., 16-cv-00794 (D. Del.).
Apotex Corp. v. Novartis AG
PTAB Petition: IPR2017-00854; filed February 3, 2017.
Patent at Issue: U.S. Patent No. 9,187,405 ("S1P receptor modulators for treating relasping-remitting multiple sclerosis," issued November 17, 2015) claims a method for reducing or preventing or alleviating relapses in Relapsing-Remitting multiple sclerosis in a subject in need thereof, comprising orally administering to said subject 2-amino-2-[2-(4-octylphenyl)ethyl]propane-1,3-diol, in free form or in a pharmaceutically acceptable salt form, at a daily dosage of 0.5 mg, absent an immediately preceding loading dose regimen.
Petitioners Apotex Inc., Apotex Corp., Apotex Pharmaceuticals Holdings Inc., and Apotex Holdings, Inc. are challenging the '405 patent on three grounds as being anticipated under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) (ground 3) or as obvious under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) (grounds 1 and 2). View the petition here.
Related Matters: According to the petition, the '405 patent is not involved in any related matters.
Rimfrost AS v. Aker Biomarine Antarctic AS
PTAB Petition: IPR2017-00746; filed February 3, 2017.
Patent at Issue: U.S. Patent No. 9,028,877 ("Bioeffective krill oil compositions," issued May 12, 2015) claims a method of production of krill oil comprising using supercritical fluid extraction in a two stage process. Stage 1 removes the neutral lipid by extracting with neat supercritical CO2 or CO2 plus approximately 5% of a co-solvent. Stage 2 extracts the actual krill oils by using supercritical CO2 in combination with approximately 20% ethanol.
Petitioner Rimfrost AS challenging the '877 patent on four grounds as being obvious under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a). View the petition here.
Related Matters: According to the petition, the '877 patent is involved in the litigation: Aker Biomarine Antarctic AS v. Olympic Holding AS; Rimfrost AS; Emerald Fisheries AS, Rimfrost USA, LLC; Avoca Inc.; and Bioriginal Food & Science Corp. Case No. 1:16-CV-00035-LPS-CJB (D. Del.). The '877 patent is also involved in U.S. International Trade Commission Investigation No. 337-TA-1019, instituted 09/16/2016.
Rimfrost AS v. Aker Biomarine Antarctic AS
PTAB Petition: IPR2017-00748; filed February 3, 2017.
Patent at Issue: U.S. Patent No. 9,028,877 ("Bioeffective krill oil compositions," issued May 12, 2015) claims a method of production of krill oil comprising using supercritical fluid extraction in a two stage process. Stage 1 removes the neutral lipid by extracting with neat supercritical CO2 or CO2 plus approximately 5% of a co-solvent. Stage 2 extracts the actual krill oils by using supercritical CO2 in combination with approximately 20% ethanol.
Petitioner Rimfrost AS challenging the '877 patent on five grounds as being obvious under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a). View the petition here.
Related Matters: According to the petition, the '877 patent is involved in the litigation: Aker Biomarine Antarctic AS v. Olympic Holding AS; Rimfrost AS; Emerald Fisheries AS, Rimfrost USA, LLC; Avoca Inc.; and Bioriginal Food & Science Corp. Case No. 1:16-CV-00035-LPS-CJB (D. Del.). The '877 patent is also involved in U.S. International Trade Commission Investigation No. 337-TA-1019, instituted 09/16/2016.
Mylan Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. Boehringer Ingelheim International GmbH
PTAB Petition: IPR2016-01563; filed August 10, 2016.
PTAB Trial Instituted; entered February 3, 2017.
Patent at Issue: U.S. Patent No. 8,673,927 ("Uses of DPP-IV inhibitors," issued March 18, 2014) claims a method of treating type II diabetes mellitus comprising administering to a patient in need thereof a pharmaceutically effective oral amount of 1-[(4-methyl-quinazolin-2-yl)-methyl]-3-methyl-7-(2-butyn-1-yl)-8-(3-(R)-- amino-piperidin-1-yl)-xanthine, and a pharmaceutically effective amount of metformin, which is from 300 mg to 1000 mg once or twice a day, or delayed-release metformin in a dose of 500 mg to 1000 mg once or twice a day or 500 mg to 2000 mg once a day.
Petitioners Mylan Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Mylan Laboratories Ltd., Mylan Inc., and Mylan N.V. are challenging the '927 patent on three grounds as being anticipated under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) (ground 1) or as obvious under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) (grounds 2 and 3). View the petition here. Administrative Patent Judges Toni R. Scheiner, Brian P. Murphy (author), and Zhenyu Yang issued a decision instituting inter partes review of whether claims 1 and 10 are obvious under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) over the '510 Publication, Ahrén, Hughes, and Brazg.
Related Matters: According to the petition, the '927 patent is the subject the following litigation: Boehringer Ingelheim Pharmaceuticals Inc., et al. v. HEC Pharm Group, et al., No. 3:15-cv-05982-PGS-TJB (D.N.J.). Petitioner concurrently filed petitions for inter partes review of U.S. Patent Nos. 9,173,859 (IPR2016-01566; filed 08/10/2016; institution denied 02/03/2017); 8,846,695 (IPR2016-01564; filed 08/10/2016; instituted 01/31/2017; pending); and 8,853,156 (IPR2016-01565; filed 08/10/2016; instituted 02/09/2017; pending).
Carefusion Corp. v. Baxter International, Inc.
PTAB Petition: IPR2016-01463; filed July 19, 2016.
PTAB Trial Instituted; entered February 6, 2017.
Patent at Issue: U.S. Patent No. 6,231,560 ("Method and apparatus for automatically controlling the level of medication," issued May 15, 2001) claims a method for automatically controlling the level of a patient's medication administered from a programmable infusion pump.
Petitioners Carefusion Corporation and Becton, Dickinson and Company are challenging the '560 patent on three grounds as being anticipated under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) (ground 1) or as obvious under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) (grounds 2 and 3). View the petition here. Administrative Patent Judges Richard E. Rice (author), Robert J. Weinschenk, and Amanda F. Wieker issued a decision instituting inter partes review of whether claims 1–3, 6, 7, and 16 of the '560 patent are obvious under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) over Bollish; and claims 1–3, 6, 7, and 16 are obvious under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) over Bollish and TITRATOR.
Related Matters: According to the petition, the '560 patent is the subject the litigation: Baxter Int'l, Inc. v. CareFusion Corp., No. 1:15-cv-09986 (N.D. Ill.).
