Weekly Patent Litigation Round-Up

Weekly Patent Litigation Round-Up


Apotex Fails to Win Review of Patent on Movement Disorder Drug

Apotex Inc. lost an administrative challenge to a patent covering Austedo, a treatment for tardive dyskinesia and Huntington’s disease chorea. Apotex asked the Patent Trial and Appeal Board in September to review Aus’s U.S. Patent No. 8,524,733, covering a chemical compound. Apotex argued the compound is obvious, having been derived from another that is decades old. Certain evidence Apotex cited was considered during the patent application process, while its arguments substantially overlapped with those heard by the examiner, the PTAB said in a Wednesday decision. It found Apotex hadn’t shown the examiner made mistakes in weighing the evidence…



Federal Court finds patent valid, but rejects infringement claims in a PM(NOC) action regarding risedronate

The Federal Court has decided an infringement action concerning risedronate products under the Patented Medicines (Notice of Compliance) Regulations (the Regulations). The Court dismissed allegations of anticipation based on prior art, as well as arguments that the asserted claims were invalid due to lack of demonstrated utility, insufficiency of disclosure, and/or overbreadth. However, the Court also found that neither direct nor indirect infringement were established…



Alvotech and AbbVie Settle Patent Dispute

Alvotech Holdings S.A. (“Alvotech”) has announced that they have settled all pending disputes between AbbVie and Alvotech related to AVT02 (100mg/mL), Alvotech’s high-concentration, citrate-free biosimilar candidate for Humira® (adalimumab). The announcement states that under the settlement agreement, Alvotech has non-exclusive rights to market AVT02 in the United States starting July 1, 2023…



Cipla files defensive patent suit over Ofev generic

Mumbai-based pharma company Cipla has filed a lawsuit asking a Delaware court to rule that its proposed generic of Boehringer Ingelheim’s lung disease treatment Ofev (Nintedanib) does not infringe two patents.…



Leave a Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

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 2023 Pharma IP Circle. All Rights Reserved