On September 18 and 19, 2025, the Patent Trial and Appeals Board (“PTAB”) issued final written decisions for four inter partes review (“IPR”) challenges brought by Merck Sharp & Dohme LLC (“Merck”) against Johns Hopkins University’s (“Johns Hopkins”) pembrolizumab patents, finding that all claims were unpatentable. The dispute between Merck…
On July 24, 2025, Acting Director of the USPTO, Coke Morgan Stewart, denied institution of inter partes review in IPR2025-00601 and IPR2025-00602, but referred the petition in IPR2025-00603 to the Board in Amgen Inc. v. Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. The Bristol-Myers Squibb (“BMS”) patents, challenged by Petitioner Amgen, relate to methods of…
On July 14, 2025 Fresenius filed two IPR petitions challenging Regeneron’s patents related to aflibercept. Regeneron has not asserted that Fresenius infringes either of these patents in district court litigation; however, there are a number of district court actions against other parties related to the patents challenged in Fresenius’s IPRs….
In a decision that issued last week, a Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”) panel instituted inter partes review (“IPR”) of a petition filed by Merck Sharp & Dohme LLC (“Merck”) for a patent owned by The Johns Hopkins University (“Johns Hopkins”), U.S. Patent No. 11,591,393 (the ’393 patent). The…
On April 22, 2024, the PTAB issued final written decisions in IPR2023-00070 and IPR2023-00074, filed by Bluebird Bio on two patents related to recombinant lentiviral vectors — U.S. Patent Nos. 7,541,179 and 8,058,061, owned by Sloan Kettering Institute for Cancer Research. The PTAB ruled that all challenged claims of the…
We previously reported on the litigation brought by ModernaTX, Inc. and Moderna US, Inc. (collectively, “Moderna”) against BioNTech SE, BioNTech Manufacturing GmbH, BioNTech US Inc. (collectively, “BioNTech”), and Pfizer Inc. (“Pfizer”) related to Moderna’s mRNA technology and the subsequent inter partes review (IPR) petitions filed by BioNTech and Pfizer. Those…
As we previously reported, REGENXBIO Inc. and the Trustees of the University of Pennsylvania filed suit in Delaware in June 2023 against Sarepta Therapeutics, Inc., Sarepta Therapeutics Three, LLC, and Catalent, Inc., alleging infringement of U.S. Patent No. 11,680,274 by Sarepta’s gene therapy product, ELEVIDYS (delandistrogene moxeparvovec-rokl). On September 19,…
Regeneron’s request for multi-district litigation As we previously reported, on January 11, 2024, Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (“Regeneron”) filed a motion seeking to establish a multi-district litigation (“MDL”) encompassing the aflibercept BPCIA cases it has filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia and transfer its case against…
On February 12, 2024, Chugai, Genentech, and Hoffmann-La Roche filed a motion for voluntary dismissal of their appeals of the PTAB’s Final Written Decisions in IPR2022-00578 and IPR2022-00579. The appeals concerned IPRs filed by Celltrion where the PTAB found all challenged claims of U.S. Patent Nos. 8,580,264 and 10,874,677 were…
Late last month, a Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”) panel instituted two petitions that were filed separately by Celltrion and Biocon for inter partes review (“IPR”) of Regeneron’s U.S. Patent 11,253,572 (“the ’572 patent”) and joined the two IPR proceedings with a pending IPR proceeding filed by Samsung Bioepis…