By James DeGiulio --
Abbott and Elan End TriCor Suit with Ranbaxy
After only a few months, Abbott Loaboratories and Elan Pharma International, along with Abbott subsidiary Fournier Laboratories, have dropped their patent suit against Ranbaxy Laboratories over the latter's generic version of the cholesterol drug TriCor. The dispute between the companies began in June 2010, when Abbott, Fournier, and Elan brought two suits against Ranbaxy in the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey following Ranbaxy's ANDA filing in April for a generic fenofibrate drug (see "Court Report," June 13, 2010). The plaintiffs accused Ranbaxy of infringing Fournier's U.S. Patent Nos. 6,277,405, 7,037,529, and 7,041,319, in one action, and Elan's and Fournier's 7,276,249 and 7,320,802 in the other action. Abbott is the exclusive licensee of the patents, while Elan has developed a system for controlling how the drug is absorbed by the body. The plaintiffs alleged that Ranbaxy acted without a reasonable basis or a good faith belief that it would not be liable for infringing the patents and asked for a preliminary injunction. Ranbaxy filed counterclaims in August, asserting patent invalidity and noninfringement.
On February 17, Judge Garrett E. Brown Jr. signed off on the parties' joint stipulation of dismissal, dropping both the claims and counterclaims without prejudice and without admitting any liability. Judge Brown's order can be found here. On February 28, Elan subsequently dropped its claims against Ranbaxy, and the two sides also agreed to drop Ranbaxy's invalidity counterclaims. The order for the latter dismissal can be found here. The end of these suits could mean Ranbaxy can now enter the U.S. market.
Merck and Teva Settle Patent Dispute over Cancidas
Merck has dropped its patent suit against Teva over its planned marketing of a generic version of the anti-fungal drug Cancidas. On November 25, 2009, Merck brought suit against Teva in the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey, alleging infringement of U.S. Patent Nos. 5,378,804, 5,514,650, and 5,952,300, which cover caspofungin acetate, the active ingredient in Cancidas (see "Court Report," December 7, 2009). In May 2010, the District Court consolidated Merck's patent action against Teva with a similar lawsuit against Sandoz (see "Court Report," May 23, 2010). Claim construction of the Merck patents at issue occurred in October through December 2010.
On February 23, Judge Stanley Chesler dismissed Merck's infringement action following its decision to settle the litigation. Trial was set to begin in fall 2011. All claims and counterclaims were dismissed, and each side will be responsible for its own costs and fees. The rest of the settlement terms remain confidential. Judge Chesler's order dismissing the case can be found here.
PDL BioPharma Settles Medimmune Synagis Litigation for $93M
After a key patent in PDL BioPharma's litigation with MedImmune was invalidated earlier this year, PDL has now settled the suit over the respiratory treatment Synagis and has agreed to pay MedImmune $92.5 million. The relationship between the parties began in 1997, when PDL granted MedImmune a license to develop certain types of antibodies covered by five PDL patents. In 1998, MedImmune received approval from the FDA to market the antibody drug Synagis, which is used to prevent lower respiratory tract disease in infants and children. In December 2008, in a complaint filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, MedImmune asked for a declaratory judgment that the five PDL patents covering the antibodies were invalid, and that it owed no payments to PDL under a patent license agreement reached by the companies (see "Court Report," December 21, 2008). PDL argued that the patents were valid and that MedImmune's antibody treatments infringed those patents. Leading up to the latest ruling in the case, only a single claim of one patent (U.S. Patent No. 6,180,370) remained at issue, which MedImmune claimed was invalid and which PDL claimed covered Synagis. Recently, MedImmune moved for summary judgment of invalidity, and PDL moved for summary judgment with respect to MedImmune's restitution claim regarding the patent royalties paid. In January, PDL was dealt a blow when a ruling came down invalidating the '370 patent at issue in the case (see "Biotech/Pharma Docket," January 20, 2011).
In the settlement, PDL agreed to pay $65 million immediately and pay another $27.5 million one year from now. In return, MedImmune, a unit of AstraZeneca PLC, agreed to dismiss with prejudice its invalidity claims against PDL's patent. The settlement resolves the last remaining claim of the long-standing patent dispute. Details regarding the settlement can be found here.
Comments