Polsinelli Podcasts - FDA Denies Amgen Citizen Petition in Biosimilar Dispute
In a formulation claim, if elements are listed separately, does this necessarily entail that those elements are “separate and distinct components”? This was the question before the district court in Regeneron...more
On April 14, 2022, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit reversed the PTAB’s determination in IPR2016-01542 that claims of Amgen’s U.S. Patent No. 8,952,138 are obvious. The ’138 patent claims are directed to...more
An en banc rehearing petition to the Federal Circuit seeks to breathe life back into the widespread practice of patenting a genus of compounds by claiming their common functional characteristics. This claiming practice was...more
UPDATE: On July 9, 2021, the Supreme Court of Canada denied Amgen’s leave to appeal (see article here). On November 3, 2020, the Federal Court of Appeal heard and dismissed the appeal of the first trial decision under the...more
In a procedurally unusual decision (but one unsurprising in all other respects), the Federal Circuit on Monday affirmed a district court's denial of a temporary restraining order to keep off the market Amgen's biosimilar...more
Today, in the Genentech v. Amgen BPCIA litigation concerning Amgen’s MVASI (bevacizumab-awwb) biosimilar product, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit issued an opinion affirming the district court’s denial of...more
Today, a panel of the Federal Circuit (Judges Moore, O’Malley, and Hughes) heard oral argument in Genentech v. Amgen. The case is on appeal from the District of Delaware, where the court denied Genentech’s motion for...more
Following the oral argument two days ago, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit today affirmed the lower court’s denial of Genentech’s motion for a preliminary injunction to enjoin sales of Amgen’s KANJINTI...more
We previously reported on Genentech’s appeal of the district court’s denial of Genentech’s motion for a preliminary injunction against Amgen’s launch of trastuzumab. Today, a Federal Circuit panel (Judges Prost, Wallach, and...more
Below we provide an update on some recent developments from several biosimilar-related cases on appeal before the Federal Circuit. Genentech v. Immunex Rhode Island, Fed. Cir. Case No. 19-2155 – briefing complete in...more
This morning, a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit issued a 24-page opinion affirming the district court’s judgment in favor of Amgen in its four-year long BPCIA patent ligation against...more
On December 6, 2019, the Federal Circuit will hear oral argument in a rituximab-related appeal by Biogen. The appeal stems from a final written decision of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) in an inter partes review...more
On November 8, 2018, on its quarterly earnings call for Q3 2018 (transcript available here), Coherus BioSciences provided updates regarding its commercial launch plans for its recently approved Udenyca™ (pegfilgrastim-cbqv)...more
Early last month, we reported that in the Amgen v. Hospira BPCIA litigation concerning Hospira’s Retacrit™ (epoetin alfa) biosimilar, Hospira had filed an appeal to the Federal Circuit from the Delaware district court’s final...more
The Situation: The Biologics Price Competition and Innovation Act was considered in a November 2017 decision by the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. The Result: The court found that the commercial...more
In a nonprecedential opinion issued on November 13, 2017, the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed a district court finding that Apotex’s aBLAs for biosimilar versions of Neulasta® and Neupogen® did...more
In Amgen Inc. v. Hospira, Inc., the Federal Circuit held that Amgen could not obtain discovery related to activities that might infringe a patent that it had not asserted in its biosimilar patent litigation against Hospira....more
In Sandoz Inc. v. Amgen Inc. (which you can read more about here), the Supreme Court held that 42 USC § 262(l)(9)(C) sets forth the exclusive federal remedy for failing to provide a copy of the biosimilar application to the...more
On June 12, 2017, in Sandoz Inc. v. Amgen Inc., the United States Supreme Court unanimously held that a drug manufacturer may give a required 180-day notice of its intent to market a biosimilar drug before receiving FDA...more
On April 26, 2017, the U.S. Supreme Court heard oral argument in Sandoz Inc. v. Amgen Inc. (Nos. 15-1039, 15-1195), on appeal from the Federal Circuit's July 21, 2015, opinion interpreting various provisions of the Biologics...more
On January 13, 2017, the Supreme Court granted certiorari in Amgen v. Sandoz, 794. F.3d 1347 (Fed. Cir. 2015) and Sandoz v. Amgen, 773 F.3d 1274 (Fed. Cir. 2014), appealed from the Federal Circuit. The petitions involve the...more
Federal Court of Appeal opines on the framework for analyzing obviousness-type double-patenting - On November 4, 2016, the Federal Court of Appeal dismissed Apotex’s appeal in Apotex Inc v Eli Lilly Canada Inc, 2016 FCA...more
Below is our Fall 2016 update on the U.S. patent litigations concerning proposed or approved biosimilar products. For additional details, please consult our BPCIA Litigation Summary Chart or our previous quarterly update...more
With the U.S. biosimilar pathway created by the Biologics Price Competition and Innovation Act (BPCIA) now fully up and running, there are now seven ongoing biosimilar litigations in the U.S. Here are brief updates on recent...more
Amgen has filed its appeal brief in Amgen v. Hospira, following the Federal Circuit’s denial of Hospira’s motion to dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction. The appeal presents an important question for biosimilar...more