This post continues our summary of substantive orders in patent litigation in the District of Minnesota. This summary includes a motion to compel production of chemical intermediates from an overseas manufacturer in...more
We previously reported on Bristol-Myers Squibb’s (“BMS”) complaint alleging AstraZeneca’s PD-L1 antibody product, IMFINZI (durvalumab), infringed U.S. Patent No. 9,402,899 (“the ’899 patent”). BMS alleged that the ’899 patent...more
On April 25, 2023, Bristol-Myers Squibb (“BMS”) filed a complaint in the District of Delaware against AstraZeneca related to AstraZeneca’s anti-PD-L1 antibody product, IMFINZI (durvalumab), alleging willful infringement of...more
On Feb. 5, 2021, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) granted approval for a new CAR T-cell therapy, Breyanzi® (lisocabtagene maraleucel), to Juno Therapeutics, a subsidiary of Bristol-Myers Squibb (BMS). Breyanzi® is...more
Mark your calendars – on December 9th, the Federal Circuit is slated to hear oral arguments as to whether two Amgen patents claiming a genus of antibodies meet the enablement requirement of 35 U.S.C. § 112. The court’s...more
Eliquis®/apixaban - Case Name: Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. v. Aurobindo Pharma USA Inc., No. 17-374-LPS (Consolidated), 2020 WL 4500226 (D. Del. Aug. 5, 2020) (Stark, J.)...more
On August 13, 2019, the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey, in Valeant Pharmaceuticals N. Am. LLC v. Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc., No. 18-cv-14305, held that venue was not proper in New Jersey over...more
On June 17, 2019, the United States District Court for the District of Delaware, in Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corp. v. Accord Healthcare Inc., et al., No. 18-cv-01043, held that venue was not proper in Delaware over Mylan...more
The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit dismissed an appeal of an inter partes review (IPR), finding that the challenger lacked appellate standing because it had terminated its attempts to develop the infringing...more
In Momenta Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. Bristol-Myers Squibb Co., the Federal Circuit dismissed Momenta’s appeal from an adverse IPR decision for lack of standing after Momenta suspended its potentially infringing biosimilar...more
In Momenta Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. Bristol-Meyers Squibb Co., the Federal Circuit issued another decision analyzing the contours of a petitioner’s Article III standing to appeal PTAB decisions upholding a patent. In contrast...more
Case Name: Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. v. Aurobindo Pharma USA Inc., C.A. No. 17-374-LPS (Consolidated), 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 179154 (D. Del. Oct. 18, 2018) (Stark, J.)....more
On February 7, 2019, in Momenta Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. Bristol-Myers Squibb Company, the Federal Circuit dismissed an appeal brought by a petitioner in an inter partes review (IPR) for lack of standing and mootness because...more
The Federal Circuit just issued a decision that confirms its stance on Article III standing for appeals from inter partes reviews (IPRs), making it tougher for unsuccessful IPR petitioners to obtain judicial review of U.S....more
This morning, the Federal Circuit issued a precedential opinion dismissing Momenta’s appeal from the PTAB’s final written decision upholding the patentability of Bristol-Myers Squibb’s abatacept patents against Momenta’s IPR...more
In 2017, the U.S. Supreme Court issued TC Heartland LLC v. Kraft Foods Group Brands LLC, which was a game changer for patent venue. The case drastically narrowed where defendants can be sued and shifted a significant amount...more
In the continuing Amgen v. Sanofi saga, Amgen has asked SCOTUS to take up the issue of written description, which is currently established by showing “whether the disclosure…reasonably conveys…that the inventor had possession...more
The District of Delaware dismissed a Hatch-Waxman Act ANDA lawsuit that Bristol-Myers Squibb had filed against Mylan Pharmaceuticals, finding that under the new venue rules established by the Supreme Court’s TC Heartland...more
On October 18, 2018, the United States District Court for the District of Delaware, in Bristol-Myers Squibb v. Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc., No. 17-00379, held that venue was not proper in Delaware over Mylan Pharmaceuticals...more
There are presently seven biosimilar-related appeals pending before the Federal Circuit. Two of those appeals, Amgen v. Sandoz (Case No. 18-1551) and Amgen v. Coherus (Case No. 18-1993), are from district court judgments in...more
On December 5, 2017, the Federal Circuit heard oral argument in Momenta Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. Bristol-Myers Squibb Company, 17-1694. Momenta is appealing a PTAB decision upholding the validity of BMS’s U.S. Patent No....more
Case Name: Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. v. Mylan Pharms., Inc., Civ. No. 17-379-LPS, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 146372 (D. Del. Sept. 11, 2017) (Stark, J.)... Drug Product and U.S. Patent: Eliquis® (apixaban); U.S. Patents Nos....more
We recently reported that Chief Judge Stark of the District of Delaware interpreted the second prong of the patent venue statute, 28 U.S.C. § 1400(b), in Bristol-Myers Squibb Company v. Mylan because the first prong was no...more
The court finds that some physical presence is required to satisfy the venue standard. On September 11, 2017, Chief Judge Leonard Stark of the US District Court for the District of Delaware handed down two decisions...more
The U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware accepted Merck’s arguments that method of treatment patents asserted by BMS against its Keytruda product “touch[] upon a natural phenomenon” such that they should be...more