The roadmap and conservative substitution methods Amgen Inc. laid out to “enable” its genus claims for antibodies that inhibit PCSK9 to lower LDL cholesterol are “little more than two research assignments,” the U.S. Supreme Court said in a unanimous opinion handed down May 18 in Amgen Inc. v. Sanofi SA that gave the win to Sanofi. The roadmap “merely describes step-by-step Amgen’s own trial-and-error method for finding functional antibodies — calling on scientists to create a wide range of candidate antibodies and then screen each to see which happen to bind to PCSK9 in the right place and block it from binding to LDL receptors,” the court said in the decision written by Justice Neil Gorsuch.
To the chagrin of some and the joy of others, the U.S. Supreme Court denied cert to Teva Pharmaceuticals USA Inc. v. Glaxosmithkline May 15, leaving standing a split Federal Circuit decision that could threaten the use of FDA-approved label carve-outs, or so-called skinny labels, for generics and biosimilars.
The U.S. Supreme Court has handed down a broadly unanimous decision that allows the targets of Federal Trade Commission (FTC) enforcement action to appeal that action to federal district court prior to the conclusion of the agency’s review or enforcement process. The outcome could prove a boon to life science companies that may now challenge FTC actions against mergers and acquisitions prior to the conclusion of that action, a point at which the company’s options have narrowed drastically.
The U.S. Supreme Court has handed down a broadly unanimous decision that allows the targets of Federal Trade Commission (FTC) enforcement action to appeal that action to federal district court prior to the conclusion of the agency’s review or enforcement process. The outcome could prove a boon to life science companies that may now challenge FTC actions against mergers and acquisitions prior to the conclusion of that action, a point at which the company’s options have narrowed drastically.
Danco Laboratories LLC’s Mifeprex (mifepristone) and Genbiopro Inc.’s generic got another temporary reprieve April 19 from a court order that would tighten access to the abortion drug.
Sanofi SA’s antitrust challenge of Mylan Inc.’s “exclusionary conduct” in the epinephrine auto-injector market met the end of the road April 17 when the U.S. Supreme Court denied cert.
The Advanced Medical Technology Association (Advamed) and the Biotechnology Innovation Organization (BIO) have teamed up on a friend-of-the-court brief for the U.S. Supreme Court’s upcoming hearing on twin cases that examine the question of a defendant’s state of mind when filing claims with federal health programs. Advamed and BIO argue that the existing judicial approach is critical to ensuring that companies in the life sciences are not subject to treble damages when acting reasonably in connection with products reimbursed by federal health programs, adding that an overturn of existing judicial practice would stifle innovation at the cost of patient access to life-saving medical therapies.
A lot of eyes and ears were tuned to the U.S. Supreme Court’s March 27 argument in Amgen Inc. v. Sanofi SA with its focus on how much enablement is necessary in broad genus patent claims.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit once again delved into genus claims as it affirmed Gilead Sciences Inc.’s win in its inter partes review (IPR) challenge of several claims in a patent held by the University of Minnesota.
The U.S. Supreme Court has declined to grant cert for a petition filed by Johnson & Johnson on behalf of its Ethicon subsidiary to review a case in California that will cost the company more than $300 million. The outcome highlights the differential hazards of advertising and promotion in various U.S. states, with California state law allowing fines of up to $2,500 for each violation of state law, an amount that can quickly tally into the hundreds of millions.
