Mifepristone – USA

Mifepristone – USA

Claim Construction (District of New Jersey): Jun. 23, 2020
Civil Action No.: 18-3632
Plaintiff: Corcept Therapeutics, Inc.
Defendants: Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc.

Before the Court are the briefs and supporting materials of Plaintiff and Defendant regarding their request for patent claim construction pursuant to Local Patent Rule 4.5(a). The Court held a Markman hearing on March 5, 2020 regarding patent claims in Plaintiff’s U.S. Patent Nos. 8,921,348 (“the ʼ348 Patent”) and 9,829,495 (“the ’495 Patent”). After carefully considering the parties’ written and oral arguments, this Court construes the three disputed claim terms as discussed below.
Claim construction:

(1) “achieve mifepristone blood levels greater than 1300 ng/mL,” (claim 1 of the ’348 Patent)

Plaintiff’s: “ensure mifepristone blood levels remain greater than 1300 ng/mL”
Defendants: Plain and ordinary meaning; no construction required. Alternatively, plain and ordinary meaning, which is: “ensure that the patient’s mifepristone blood levels are greater than 1300 ng/mL”
The Court: Plain and ordinary meaning; no construction required.
(2) “a method of concurrently treating Cushing’s syndrome and differentially diagnosing adrenocorticotropic hormone (ACTH)-dependent Cushing’s syndrome,” (claim 1 of the ’495 Patent)

Plaintiff’s: “a method of concurrently treating Cushing syndrome and [differentially diagnosing adrenocorticotropic hormone (ACTH)-dependent Cushing’s syndrome / obtaining a measurement indicative of differential diagnosis of adrenocorticotropic hormone (ACTH)-dependent Cushing’s syndrome] in order to recommend transphenoidal surgery or appropriate imaging to identify source of the ectopic ACTH secretion”
Defendants: Plain and ordinary meaning; no construction required. Alternatively, plain and ordinary meaning, which is: “a method of concurrently treating Cushing’s syndrome and [distinguishing between different types of ACTH-dependent Cushing’s syndrome / obtaining a measurement to distinguish between different types of ACTH-dependent Cushing’s syndrome]”
The Court: Plain and ordinary meaning; no construction required.
(3) “a method of concurrently treating Cushing’s syndrome and obtaining a measurement indicative of differential diagnosis of adrenocorticotropic hormone (ACTH)-dependent Cushing’s syndrome,” claim 18 of the ’495 Patent

Plaintiff’s: “a method of concurrently treating Cushing syndrome and [differentially diagnosing adrenocorticotropic hormone (ACTH)-dependent Cushing’s syndrome / obtaining a measurement indicative of differential diagnosis of adrenocorticotropic hormone (ACTH)-dependent Cushing’s syndrome] in order to recommend transphenoidal surgery or appropriate imaging to identify source of the ectopic ACTH secretion”
Defendants: Plain and ordinary meaning; no construction required. Alternatively, plain and ordinary meaning, which is: “a method of concurrently treating Cushing’s syndrome and [distinguishing between different types of ACTH-dependent Cushing’s syndrome / obtaining a measurement to distinguish between different types of ACTH-dependent Cushing’s syndrome]”
The Court: Plain and ordinary meaning; no construction required.

Leave a Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

Disclaimer
All content provided on this blog is for informational purposes only. By using the blog, you agree that the information on this blog does not constitute legal or other professional advice on author's or on his company's behalf.

Copyrights 2022 Pharma IP Circle. All Rights Reserved