DCT

1:24-cv-01033

Novartis Pharma Corp v. Natco Pharma Ltd

Log In

I. Executive Summary and Procedural Information

  • Parties & Counsel:
  • Case Identification: 1:24-cv-01033, D. Del., 09/13/2024
  • Venue Allegations: Venue is alleged to be proper in the District of Delaware because Defendants Natco Pharma USA LLC and Natco Pharma, Inc. are organized under Delaware law and reside in the district, and Defendant Natco Pharma Limited is a foreign entity.
  • Core Dispute: Plaintiffs allege that Defendants' submission of an Abbreviated New Drug Application (ANDA) to market a generic version of the breast cancer drug KISQALI® constitutes an act of infringement of two patents covering a specific salt form of the active ingredient and methods of using it.
  • Technical Context: The technology concerns a specific crystalline salt form (succinate salt) of the compound ribociclib, an inhibitor of cyclin-dependent kinases (CDKs) used in oncology.
  • Key Procedural History: This is a Hatch-Waxman action initiated after Defendants notified Plaintiffs via a Paragraph IV certification letter that they were seeking FDA approval for a generic drug prior to the expiration of Plaintiffs' patents. The complaint states the patents are listed in the FDA's "Orange Book" for KISQALI®, and that this suit was filed within the 45-day statutory window, triggering a potential 30-month stay of FDA approval for the generic.

Case Timeline

Date Event
2010-11-10 Priority Date for '732 and '739 Patents
2015-11-24 U.S. Patent No. 9,193,732 Issued
2018-01-16 U.S. Patent No. 9,868,739 Issued
2024-07-29 Date of Natco Notice Letter to Plaintiffs
2024-09-13 Complaint Filing Date

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

U.S. Patent No. 9,193,732 - “Salt(s) of 7-Cyclopentyl-2-(5-piperazin-1-yl-pyridin-2-ylamino)-7H-pyrrolo[2,3-d]pyrimidine-6-carboxylic acid dimethylamide and Processes of Making Thereof,” Issued Nov. 24, 2015

The Invention Explained

  • Problem Addressed: The patent’s background indicates that while the base chemical compound, ribociclib, was a known inhibitor of cyclin-dependent kinases, a version suitable for pharmaceutical development was needed ('732 Patent, col. 1:47-56). The development of a drug product often requires identifying a salt form of the active ingredient that possesses ideal physical and chemical properties.
  • The Patented Solution: The invention is the succinate salt of the ribociclib compound ('732 Patent, col. 1:63-65). The specification asserts that this specific salt form provides advantages critical for a drug product, including "good stability, non-hygroscopicity, and good solubility" ('732 Patent, col. 4:20-25). The claims further define the invention by its specific crystalline structure, identified through analytical techniques like X-ray Powder Diffraction (XRPD) ('732 Patent, Fig. 2).
  • Technical Importance: Identifying a stable, soluble, and non-hygroscopic salt form is a crucial step in transforming a potent chemical agent into a viable, manufacturable, and therapeutically effective oral medication.

Key Claims at a Glance

  • The complaint asserts infringement of at least claim 9 (Compl. ¶33, ¶46).
  • Independent Claim 1: Defines the core invention as the "Succinate salt of [ribociclib] characterized by the initial X-ray Powder Diffraction (XRPD) illustrated in FIG. 2."
  • Asserted Claim 9 (dependent on claims 1-8): Recites a pharmaceutical composition with two essential elements:
    • (a) a therapeutically effective amount of a salt according to any of claims 1-8 (which include the succinate salt defined by the XRPD in FIG. 2 and other analytical data).
    • (b) at least one pharmaceutically acceptable carrier, diluent, vehicle or excipient.

U.S. Patent No. 9,868,739 - “Salt(s) of 7-Cyclopentyl-2-(5-piperazin-1-yl-pyridin-2-ylamino)-7H-pyrrolo[2,3-d]pyrimidine-6-carboxylic acid dimethylamide and Processes of Making Thereof,” Issued Jan. 16, 2018

The Invention Explained

  • Problem Addressed: As with the '732 Patent, the invention addresses the need for a therapeutically useful application for the newly developed, stable succinate salt of ribociclib ('739 Patent, col. 1:47-60).
  • The Patented Solution: The patent claims methods of treating certain diseases by administering the specific succinate salt of ribociclib ('739 Patent, col. 2:51-58). The invention is not just the compound, but its specific use in therapy for diseases that respond to the inhibition of cyclin-dependent kinases.
  • Technical Importance: This patent provides the therapeutic framework for the novel salt form, linking the stable chemical entity to a specific medical use in treating cancers, particularly breast cancer.

Key Claims at a Glance

  • The complaint asserts infringement of at least claim 9 (Compl. ¶39, ¶57).
  • Independent Claim 1: Defines a "method of treating a cancer which responds to an inhibition of cyclin dependent kinases activity" by administering a "therapeutically effective amount of a succinate salt of [ribociclib] characterized by the initial X-ray Powder Diffraction (XRPD) illustrated in FIG. 2."
  • Asserted Claim 9 (dependent on claims 1-8): Specifies that the cancer treated by the method is selected from a list that includes "breast cancer" (Compl. ¶39).

III. The Accused Instrumentality

Product Identification

The accused instrumentality is Defendants’ proposed generic 200 mg ribociclib tablets, for which they seek FDA approval via ANDA No. 219528 (the "ANDA Product") (Compl. ¶1).

Functionality and Market Context

The complaint alleges that the ANDA Product contains "ribociclib succinate," the salt form claimed in the asserted patents, as well as at least one "pharmaceutically acceptable carrier, diluent, vehicle or excipient" (Compl. ¶46). As a generic version of KISQALI®, the ANDA Product is intended for the same therapeutic uses, namely the treatment of certain types of advanced or metastatic breast cancer (Compl. ¶40, ¶58). The filing of the ANDA itself, seeking approval to market this product, constitutes the alleged act of infringement (Compl. ¶11).

IV. Analysis of Infringement Allegations

No probative visual evidence provided in complaint.

'732 Patent Infringement Allegations

Claim Element (from Independent Claim 1, via Claim 9) Alleged Infringing Functionality Complaint Citation Patent Citation
A pharmaceutical composition comprising: (a) a therapeutically effective amount of a ... Succinate salt of 7-Cyclopentyl-2-(5-piperazin-1-yl-pyridin-2-ylamino)-7H-pyrrolo[2,3-d]pyrimidine-6-carboxylic acid dimethylamide characterized by the initial X-ray Powder Diffraction (XRPD) illustrated in FIG. 2 The ANDA Product is alleged to contain "ribociclib succinate," which is the pharmaceutically acceptable salt of ribociclib recited in the claims of the '732 patent. ¶46 col. 2:2-17
and (b) at least one pharmaceutically acceptable carrier, diluent, vehicle or excipient. The ANDA Product is alleged to contain at least one pharmaceutically acceptable carrier, diluent, vehicle, or excipient. ¶46 col. 2:46-50

'739 Patent Infringement Allegations

Claim Element (from Independent Claim 1, via Claim 9) Alleged Infringing Functionality Complaint Citation Patent Citation
A method of treating a cancer ... comprising the step of administering to a subject in need ... a therapeutically effective amount of a succinate salt of [ribociclib] The complaint alleges that Defendants' proposed instructions and label for the ANDA product will direct physicians and patients to administer the drug for the treatment of breast cancer. ¶59-60 col. 2:51-58
characterized by the initial X-ray Powder Diffraction (XRPD) illustrated in FIG. 2 The complaint alleges that the ANDA Product contains the specific salt form of ribociclib covered by the patent claims, which is characterized by specific analytical data including the XRPD in FIG. 2. ¶41, ¶58 col. 2:64-66

Identified Points of Contention

  • Technical Question: A primary factual question will be whether the crystalline structure of the ribociclib succinate in the ANDA Product meets the specific limitations recited in the asserted claims (e.g., "characterized by the initial X-ray Powder Diffraction (XRPD) illustrated in FIG. 2"). The dispute may focus on whether Defendants' proposed generic utilizes the same polymorph as the patented invention or a different, non-infringing one.
  • Scope Question: For the '739 Patent, a potential issue is whether the proposed label for the ANDA Product will instruct administration for all the limitations of the claimed method, thereby establishing the specific intent required for induced infringement.

V. Key Claim Terms for Construction

  • The Term: "characterized by the initial X-ray Powder Diffraction (XRPD) illustrated in FIG. 2"
  • Context and Importance: This term appears in the independent claims of both asserted patents and defines the specific crystalline polymorph of the claimed salt. Its construction is critical because infringement will depend on whether the defendant's product possesses this precise physical form. Practitioners may focus on this term because disputes over polymorphism are common in pharmaceutical patent litigation, and the outcome often determines whether a generic product infringes.
  • Intrinsic Evidence for Interpretation:
    • Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: A party might argue that the term identifies a particular crystalline form but allows for minor, instrument-related variations in peak position and intensity, pointing to specification language that broadly discloses the "succinate salt" without reference to a specific polymorph in the "Summary of the Invention" ('732 Patent, col. 1:63-65).
    • Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: A party could argue the term strictly limits the claim scope to a salt that produces an XRPD pattern substantially identical to the one depicted in FIG. 2. The explicit recitation of the figure in the claim itself, and the patent's extensive description of the properties of the material that produced this pattern, may suggest that this specific form is essential to the invention ('732 Patent, col. 21:1-22:11).

VI. Other Allegations

  • Indirect Infringement: The complaint alleges that, should the ANDA be approved, Defendants will induce infringement of the '739 method patent. This allegation is based on the assertion that the product's label and instructions will encourage physicians and patients to use the generic drug in the patented manner (Compl. ¶60). The complaint also pleads contributory infringement, alleging the ANDA product is a material part of the invention and not a staple article suitable for substantial non-infringing use (Compl. ¶61).
  • Willful Infringement: The complaint does not use the term "willful infringement." It does, however, allege that Defendants had "actual knowledge" of the asserted patents prior to submitting the ANDA, based on the Paragraph IV certification letter (Compl. ¶51, ¶64). The prayer for relief seeks a declaration that the case is "exceptional" pursuant to 35 U.S.C. §285, which would permit an award of attorney's fees (Compl. ¶72).

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

  • A core issue will be one of polymorphic identity: Does the crystalline form of ribociclib succinate in Defendants' ANDA product fall within the scope of the asserted claims, which are defined by specific analytical data such as the XRPD pattern shown in FIG. 2 of the patents? The case will likely involve a detailed, evidence-based comparison of the physical forms of the brand-name and generic drugs.
  • A key question for the '739 patent will be one of induced infringement: Is the language of Defendants' proposed product label sufficient to demonstrate the specific intent to encourage or instruct physicians to perform the patented methods of treatment for breast cancer?