Takeda Unit Asks Judge to Wipe Out $155M Infringement Verdict Over Hemophilia Drug
In a court filing Friday, Baxalta Inc. argued that Bayer's patent was invalid and that the German-based pharmaceutical firm had presented no evidence to support the jury's damages award.
March 11, 2019 at 03:05 PM
3 minute read
A unit of Takeda Pharmaceutical Co. Ltd. has asked a federal judge to toss a $155 million jury verdict last month finding that it had infringed a patent for Bayer AG's hemophilia treatment.
In a court filing Friday, Baxalta Inc. argued that Bayer's patent was invalid and that the German-based pharmaceutical firm had presented no evidence to support the jury's damages award. According to Baxalta, Bayer never disclosed to the public how to make and use the full scope of its claims, and the drug's inventors testified at trial that they did not know how to make a key feature of the drug that was covered by the patent.
“The '520 patent claims cannot, as a matter of law, be so broad so as to encompass what it does not teach and the inventors did not know how to achieve,” Baxalta's attorneys from Haug Partners in New York wrote in a motion for judgment as a matter of law.
Friday's filing came one month after Bayer and its team from Sidley Austin notched their $155 million win in the case, which began when Baxalta was still owned by Irish biopharmacuetical firm Shire.
Bayer had argued that the infringement stemmed from Baxalta's partnership with Nektar Therapeutics, a San Francisco-based company that had briefly done research with Bayer and knew about its patent through previous drug applications and litigation in Germany. According to the complaint, Nektar later partnered with Baxalta to make Adynovate, its flagship hemophilia treatment, and “knew or should have known” that the drug infringed Bayer's patent.
After a five-day trial, the Wilmington jury rejected Baxalta's invalidity defenses and applied a 17.7 percent royalty rate to a base of nearly $873 million in reaching its total damage award.
Baxalta argued in its post-trial motion that the verdict was unwarranted, saying that Bayer had “improperly and repeatedly” asked the jury to speculate on damages, beyond what Baxalta had made in profits from Adynovate. The company also moved for a new trial because, it said, the jury's verdict was “against the clear weight of the evidence.”
Bayer, meanwhile, asked U.S. District Judge Richard G. Andrews of the District of Delaware in a separate filing Friday to tack on another $27 million in supplemental damages, including $8.3 million in pre-judgment interest. A brief accompanying Bayer's motion was not made public on Monday.
As it stands, Japan-based Takeda, which announced its $62 billion purchase of Shire last year, is now on the hook for the verdict.
Attorneys for Bayer and Baxalta were not immediately available to comment.
Bayer was represented by Jim Badke, Sona De, Ching-Lee Fukuda, Caroline Bercier and Julie Hsia of Sidley Austin in New York; Kevin O'Brien, Sue Wang and Saurabh Prabhakar of the firm's San Francisco office; Gwen Hochman Stewart and Grace L.W. St. Vincent in Chicago; and Lauren Cranford Katzeff in Washington, D.C. Rodger D. Smith II and Michael J. Flynn of Morris, Nichols, Arsht & Tunnell acted as Delaware counsel.
Baxalta was represented by Edgar H. Haug, Angus Chen, Porter F. Fleming, Richard F. Kurz and Erika V. Selli of Haug Partners in New York and Frederick L. Cottrell, Kelly E. Farnan and Nicole K. Pedi of Richards, Layton & Finger in Wilmington.
The case is captioned Bayer Healthcare v. Baxalta.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllWilson Sonsini Knocks Out Claims Against Inhibrx Biosciences in Trade Secrets Verdict
Chancery Again Rules in Plaintiff's Favor in Earnout Provision Dispute
3 minute readNovo Nordisk Files Patent Claims to Fend off Generic Rivals of Wegovy
3 minute readTrending Stories
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250