DCT

1:10-cv-00057

Abbott Laboratories v. Watson Laboratories Inc. - Florida

Log In

I. Executive Summary and Procedural Information

  • Parties & Counsel:
  • Case Identification: 1:10-cv-00057, D. Del., 01/25/2010
  • Venue Allegations: Plaintiff alleges venue is proper in the District of Delaware because Defendant Teva USA is a Delaware corporation that manufactures and distributes drugs in the district, and Defendant Teva Industries has previously availed itself of the court's jurisdiction by filing claims in other actions.
  • Core Dispute: Plaintiff alleges that Defendants' filing of an Abbreviated New Drug Application (ANDA) for a generic version of Plaintiff's SIMCOR® drug product constitutes an act of infringement of eight patents related to nicotinic acid compositions for treating hyperlipidemia.
  • Technical Context: The technology concerns oral pharmaceutical compositions of extended-release nicotinic acid (niacin), a drug used to manage high cholesterol and other lipid abnormalities, which are significant risk factors for cardiovascular disease.
  • Key Procedural History: This action was initiated under the Hatch-Waxman Act following a Notice Letter dated December 8, 2009, in which Teva informed Abbott of its ANDA filing with a "Paragraph IV certification." This certification asserts that the patents listed in the FDA's "Orange Book" for SIMCOR® are invalid and/or will not be infringed by Teva's proposed generic product.

Case Timeline

Date Event
1993-09-20 Earliest Priority Date for ’428, ’930, ’715, ’967, ’691, ’229, ’848 Patents
1997-07-31 Priority Date for ’035 Patent
2000-06-27 U.S. Patent No. 6,080,428 Issued
2000-10-10 U.S. Patent No. 6,129,930 Issued
2002-06-18 U.S. Patent No. 6,406,715 Issued
2002-10-22 U.S. Patent No. 6,469,035 Issued
2004-01-13 U.S. Patent No. 6,676,967 Issued
2004-06-08 U.S. Patent No. 6,746,691 Issued
2004-11-16 U.S. Patent No. 6,818,229 Issued
2006-03-14 U.S. Patent No. 7,011,848 Issued
2009-12-08 Teva sends ANDA Notice Letter to Abbott
2010-01-25 Complaint Filing Date

II. Technology and Patent(s)-in-Suit Analysis

U.S. Patent No. 6,080,428

  • Patent Identification: U.S. Patent No. 6,080,428, "Nicotinic Acid Compositions for Treating Hyperlipidemia and Related Methods Thereof," issued June 27, 2000. (Compl. ¶17).
  • The Invention Explained:
    • Problem Addressed: The patent describes a dilemma in nicotinic acid therapy. Immediate-release formulations are effective but cause significant cutaneous flushing, a major side effect. Prior sustained-release formulations, designed to reduce flushing, were found to have diminished therapeutic benefits (e.g., lower reduction in triglycerides) and were associated with a greater risk of liver toxicity. (’428 Patent, col. 1:53–col. 2:41).
    • The Patented Solution: The invention is a method for treating hyperlipidemia by administering an oral composition of nicotinic acid and a swelling agent, specifically hydroxypropyl methylcellulose, once per day "nocturnally," meaning in the evening or at night. (’428 Patent, Abstract; col. 3:19–24). This combination of a specific sustained-release formulation with a nocturnal dosing schedule claims to provide a "balanced lipid alteration" while maintaining an acceptable safety profile regarding liver function. (’428 Patent, col. 2:42–51).
    • Technical Importance: The claimed method sought to deliver the known lipid-altering benefits of nicotinic acid while mitigating both the acute flushing side effect of immediate-release versions and the safety and efficacy concerns of previous sustained-release versions. (’428 Patent, col. 2:42–51).
  • Key Claims at a Glance:
    • The complaint asserts infringement of "one or more claims" without specifying any particular claim (Compl. ¶31). Independent method claim 1 is representative.
    • Claim 1 includes the following essential elements:
      • A method of treating hyperlipidemia in a hyperlipidemic.
      • Dosing the hyperlipidemic with an effective antihyperlipidemic amount of nicotinic acid.
      • The dosing occurs once per day in the evening or at night.
      • The nicotinic acid is combined with at least one pharmaceutically acceptable carrier to form an oral solid dosage form.

U.S. Patent No. 6,129,930

  • Patent Identification: U.S. Patent No. 6,129,930, "Methods and Sustained Release Nicotinic Acid Compositions for Treating Hyperlipidemia at Night," issued October 10, 2000. (Compl. ¶18).
  • The Invention Explained:
    • Problem Addressed: The patent addresses the same technical problem as the ’428 Patent: the flushing associated with immediate-release niacin and the reduced efficacy and increased liver toxicity associated with prior sustained-release formulations. (’930 Patent, col. 1:27–col. 2:51).
    • The Patented Solution: The invention is a daily method of treating hyperlipidemia by administering a sustained-release nicotinic acid composition once per day in the evening. (’930 Patent, Abstract). The method claims to provide therapeutic benefit "without causing abnormalities in uric acid levels or glucose levels or both to an extent which would require said daily treatment to be discontinued." (’930 Patent, col. 15:28–34).
    • Technical Importance: This method provided a therapeutic regimen intended to maximize the lipid-altering effects of niacin while minimizing adverse events, including not only flushing and liver toxicity but also potential metabolic disturbances related to uric acid and glucose. (’930 Patent, col. 2:48–51).
  • Key Claims at a Glance:
    • The complaint asserts infringement of "one or more claims" without specifying any particular claim (Compl. ¶36). Independent method claim 1 is representative.
    • Claim 1 includes the following essential elements:
      • A daily method of treating hyperlipidemia in a patient.
      • Orally administering a sustained release composition of nicotinic acid once per day during the evening.
      • Providing an effective amount to induce lowering of cholesterol and triglycerides and an increase in HDL.
      • Doing so "without causing abnormalities" in uric acid or glucose levels that would require treatment discontinuation.
      • The composition comprises nicotinic acid and an excipient to provide sustained release.

Multi-Patent Capsule Summaries

  • Patent Identification: U.S. Patent No. 6,406,715, "Intermediate Release Nicotinic Acid Compositions for Treating Hyperlipidemia Having Unique Urinary Metabolite Profiles," issued June 18, 2002. (Compl. ¶19).

    • Technology Synopsis: This patent describes intermediate-release nicotinic acid formulations characterized by specific "urinary metabolite profiles." The formulation is designed for once-a-day administration to treat hyperlipidemia without causing significant hepatotoxicity or other adverse metabolic effects. (’715 Patent, Abstract).
    • Asserted Claims: One or more claims. (Compl. ¶41).
    • Accused Features: Teva’s generic niacin extended-release / simvastatin tablets. (Compl. ¶41).

  • Patent Identification: U.S. Patent No. 6,469,035, "Methods of Pretreating Hyperlipidemic Individuals with a Flush Inhibiting Agent Prior to the Start of Single Daily Dose Nicotinic Acid Therapy to Reduce Flushing Provoked by Nicotinic Acid," issued October 22, 2002. (Compl. ¶20).

    • Technology Synopsis: This patent claims a method of pretreating patients with a flush-inhibiting agent (such as aspirin) for a period of time (e.g., 7 to 14 days) before starting a single daily dose of nicotinic acid therapy. The pretreatment is intended to reduce the flushing side effect commonly associated with initiating niacin treatment. (’035 Patent, Abstract).
    • Asserted Claims: One or more claims. (Compl. ¶46).
    • Accused Features: The use of Teva’s generic niacin extended-release / simvastatin tablets, allegedly as part of a therapeutic regimen that would induce infringement. (Compl. ¶47).

  • Patent Identification: U.S. Patent No. 6,676,967, "Methods for Reducing Flushing in Individuals Being Treated with Nicotinic Acid for Hyperlipidemia," issued January 13, 2004. (Compl. ¶21).

    • Technology Synopsis: This patent describes intermediate-release nicotinic acid formulations with specific biopharmaceutical characteristics. The method of use involves once-daily administration in the evening to reduce flushing and treat hyperlipidemia without causing hepatotoxicity that would require discontinuation of therapy. (’967 Patent, Abstract).
    • Asserted Claims: One or more claims. (Compl. ¶51).
    • Accused Features: Teva’s generic niacin extended-release / simvastatin tablets. (Compl. ¶51).

  • Patent Identification: U.S. Patent No. 6,746,691, "Intermediate Release Nicotinic Acid Compositions for Treating Hyperlipidemia Having Unique Biopharmaceutical Characteristics," issued June 8, 2004. (Compl. ¶22).

    • Technology Synopsis: This patent is directed to intermediate-release nicotinic acid formulations that have specific biopharmaceutical characteristics, such as Cmax, Tmax, and AUC values. These formulations are designed for once-daily administration to treat hyperlipidemia while avoiding drug-induced hepatotoxicity. (’691 Patent, Abstract).
    • Asserted Claims: One or more claims. (Compl. ¶56).
    • Accused Features: Teva’s generic niacin extended-release / simvastatin tablets. (Compl. ¶56).

  • Patent Identification: U.S. Patent No. 6,818,229, "Intermediate Release Nicotinic Acid Compositions for Treating Hyperlipidemia," issued November 16, 2004. (Compl. ¶23).

    • Technology Synopsis: This patent describes intermediate-release oral nicotinic acid formulations characterized by specific in vitro dissolution profiles. The compositions are intended for once-daily administration to treat hyperlipidemia. (’229 Patent, Abstract).
    • Asserted Claims: One or more claims. (Compl. ¶61).
    • Accused Features: Teva’s generic niacin extended-release / simvastatin tablets. (Compl. ¶61).

  • Patent Identification: U.S. Patent No. 7,011,848, "Hydrophobic Component Free Sustained Release Nicotinic Acid Compositions for Treating Hyperlipidemia and Related Methods Therefor," issued March 14, 2006. (Compl. ¶24).

    • Technology Synopsis: This patent relates to sustained-release nicotinic acid compositions that are free of hydrophobic components. The formulation includes nicotinic acid and hydroxypropyl methylcellulose and is intended for once-daily nocturnal administration to treat hyperlipidemia. (’848 Patent, Abstract).
    • Asserted Claims: One or more claims. (Compl. ¶66).
    • Accused Features: Teva’s generic niacin extended-release / simvastatin tablets. (Compl. ¶66).

III. The Accused Instrumentality

  • Product Identification: Defendants’ 1000 mg / 20 mg niacin extended release / simvastatin tablets, for which Teva submitted ANDA No. 200478 to the FDA. (Compl. Nature of Action).
  • Functionality and Market Context: The complaint alleges that Teva’s product is a generic version of Abbott’s SIMCOR® drug product (Compl. Nature of Action). As such, it is alleged to have the same active ingredients (niacin and simvastatin), dosage form, strength, and route of administration as SIMCOR®, and to be bioequivalent (Compl. ¶27). The product is intended for the treatment of hyperlipidemia. Teva is seeking FDA approval to manufacture and sell its product commercially in the United States before the expiration of the patents-in-suit (Compl. ¶26). No probative visual evidence provided in complaint.

IV. Analysis of Infringement Allegations

The complaint does not provide specific claim charts or detailed technical comparisons. The infringement allegations are based on the premise that Teva's submission of an ANDA for a bioequivalent generic version of SIMCOR® is an act of infringement under 35 U.S.C. § 271(e)(2), because SIMCOR® itself is covered by the patents-in-suit (Compl. ¶¶25, 27, 31).

’428 Patent Infringement Allegations

Claim Element (from Independent Claim 1) Alleged Infringing Functionality Complaint Citation Patent Citation
A method of treating hyperlipidemia...comprising dosing the hyperlipidemic with an effective antihyperlipidemic amount of nicotinic acid The accused product is a 1000 mg niacin tablet intended to treat hyperlipidemia. ¶27 col. 3:61–64
once per day in the evening or at night The accused product is a generic equivalent of SIMCOR® and its proposed labeling will instruct for once-daily nocturnal administration. ¶27 col. 11:19–21
wherein said nicotinic acid is combined with at least one pharmaceutically acceptable carrier to form an oral solid dosage form The accused product is an oral solid tablet. Nature of Action col. 3:3–8

’930 Patent Infringement Allegations

Claim Element (from Independent Claim 1) Alleged Infringing Functionality Complaint Citation Patent Citation
orally administering...a sustained release composition of nicotinic acid once per day during the evening The accused product is an extended-release niacin tablet which, as a bioequivalent to SIMCOR®, will be prescribed for once-daily evening use. ¶27 col. 3:45–50
for providing an effective antihyperidemic amount...to induce at least some lowering of total cholesterol...and at least some increase in HDL cholesterol The accused product contains active ingredients for treating hyperlipidemia and is represented as bioequivalent to SIMCOR®, which provides these effects. ¶27 col. 3:11–14
without causing abnormalities in uric acid levels or glucose levels or both to an extent which would require said daily treatment to be discontinued The complaint alleges infringement of the method claim by virtue of the ANDA filing; this implies the use of Teva's product will meet all limitations of the claimed method. ¶27 col. 2:48–51
  • Identified Points of Contention:
    • Scope Questions: A central dispute may be the construction of "sustained release" or "intermediate release." The specific dissolution profile and release mechanism of Teva's formulation will be compared against the scope of these terms as defined by the patents' specifications and prosecution histories.
    • Technical Questions: The complaint does not specify the excipients in Teva’s formulation. A key factual question will be whether Teva's product contains hydroxypropyl methylcellulose or another agent that functions as the claimed "swelling agent." For the ’930 patent, a question will be whether use of Teva's product can be proven to occur "without causing abnormalities" in the claimed metabolic parameters, a negative limitation that may be difficult to prove and a target for invalidity challenges.

V. Key Claim Terms for Construction

The complaint does not provide sufficient detail for analysis of specific claim term disputes. However, based on the technology, certain terms are central.

  • The Term: "sustained release" / "intermediate release"

    • Context and Importance: The precise rate of niacin release is the core of the asserted inventions, intended to balance efficacy against side effects. The definition of this term will be critical to determining if Teva's formulation, with its own specific release profile, falls within the scope of the claims. Practitioners may focus on this term because Teva will likely argue its formulation's release characteristics are different from those claimed or rendered obvious by prior art.
    • Intrinsic Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: The specifications define "sustained release" functionally as releasing the active ingredient "over a period of time" after administration (’428 Patent, col. 3:45–50).
    • Intrinsic Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: The specifications provide preferred embodiments and dissolution profiles, such as release over "approximately 4-24 hours" (’428 Patent, col. 3:52–54) or specific profiles in later patents (e.g., ’229 Patent, Claim 1), which could be used to argue for a narrower construction tied to these specific characteristics.

  • The Term: "nocturnally" / "in the evening or at night"

    • Context and Importance: This dosing time is a key limitation of the primary method claims, linked to the patents' theory of aligning drug action with the body's circadian rhythm of lipid synthesis.
    • Intrinsic Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: The terms are used generally in the specification without a specific time-of-day restriction, suggesting a conventional understanding (e.g., post-dinner, before sleep). (’428 Patent, col. 11:19–21).
    • Intrinsic Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: It is possible, though not explicitly stated, that arguments could be made to tie the term to the scientific rationale presented, potentially limiting its scope to a specific physiological window, although the intrinsic evidence for such a limitation is not strong.

VI. Other Allegations

  • Indirect Infringement: The complaint alleges Defendants will actively induce and contribute to infringement (Compl. ¶32, ¶37). This allegation is likely based on the future act of selling the generic product with a label and package insert that instructs physicians and patients to administer it in a manner that would directly infringe the asserted method claims (e.g., once daily in the evening for hyperlipidemia).
  • Willful Infringement: The complaint alleges that Teva had "actual and constructive knowledge" of the patents prior to filing its ANDA (Compl. ¶33, ¶38). This assertion is based on the statutory requirement for an ANDA filer to address patents listed in the Orange Book. While this establishes the knowledge element for induced infringement, the complaint does not explicitly allege "willful" infringement or seek enhanced damages under 35 U.S.C. § 284.

VII. Analyst’s Conclusion: Key Questions for the Case

  • A core issue will be one of technical scope: does the specific dissolution profile and formulation of Teva's extended-release niacin tablet fall within the scope of the terms "sustained release" or "intermediate release" as construed from the patents-in-suit, or is it technically distinct?
  • A central validity question will be one of non-obviousness: was it obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the inventions to combine a known sustained-release niacin formulation with a "nocturnal" dosing regimen to achieve the claimed balance of efficacy and safety, particularly in light of the known side effects of prior niacin therapies?
  • A key evidentiary question will arise from the complaint's lack of technical detail: what are the actual formulation and performance characteristics of Teva's proposed generic product? The outcome of the infringement analysis will depend entirely on facts regarding Teva's product that will emerge during discovery.