No Clinical Trial, No Injunction in Biopharma Trade Secret Case
Fenwick lawyers persuade Colorado judge that without a drug in clinical trials, there's no rush to enjoin nine employees from continuing to work at Loxo Oncology Inc.
June 28, 2019 at 06:07 PM
3 minute read
A Colorado federal judge has just made it a little tougher for biopharma companies to get pretrial injunctions based on trade secret allegations.
Judge Philip Brimmer on Wednesday turned away Array BioPharma's attempt to immediately stop nine former employees from working with former collaboration partner Loxo Oncology Inc. Without evidence that the partnership has produced a drug ready for clinical trials, there were no grounds for an injunction. “Irreparable harm that may occur years in the future, and certainly not before a trial on the merits, does not warrant injunctive relief,” Brimmer wrote.
The decision handed an early win to Eli Lilly and Co. subsidiary Loxo and its attorneys at Fenwick & West and Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr.
Loxo and Boulder, Colorado-based Array struck a five-year collaboration deal in 2013 to develop targeted cancer drugs. Loxo opened its own lab in Boulder in 2017 and hired two of Array's scientists, then added seven more last fall after the deal expired.
Array and its Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan counsel accuse Loxo of misappropriating the know-how on which Array built its drug discovery business. They sought to enjoin Loxo from letting the employees continue to work on “the subject matter of Array's trade secret programs and platforms.” Array is also represented by Polsinelli.
Loxo replied that it retains exclusive rights under the deal to continue the collaboration work, and that Array was attempting to manufacture non-compete agreements where none exist. It also argued that Array hadn't made a case for imminent or actual harm.
Brimmer ruled for Loxo following a June 11 evidentiary hearing. Although Array submitted evidence of a “very far advanced” compound, it did not show that Loxo has developed a drug based on Array's trade secrets “that is ripe for clinical trials, that such drug will soon be submitted for FDA approval, or that such drug is soon to hit the market.”
In the uncertain world of drug development, “a remote possibility of future injury is not enough.”
Fenwick partners Jedediah Wakefield and Robert Counihan and associate Jeffrey Ware represented Loxo at the June 11 hearing along with Wilmer partner Regina Rodriguez. Fenwick partner Patrick Premo is also counsel to Loxo.
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
'Blatant and Audacious': Sideman & Bancroft Wins Injunction for Biotech Startup Trilobio in Trade Secrets Theft Case
Los Angeles Secures $35M Settlement From Monsanto in Water Contamination Lawsuit
After Guiding Illumina Through Harrowing Merger Fight, GC Charles Dadswell to Depart
Trending 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