DCT

3:22-cv-04635

Helsinn Healthcare SA v. Gland Pharma Ltd

Log In
Key Events
Complaint

I. Executive Summary and Procedural Information

  • Parties & Counsel:
  • Case Identification: 3:22-cv-04635, D.N.J., 07/18/2022
  • Venue Allegations: Plaintiff alleges venue is proper because Defendant is a foreign corporation subject to personal jurisdiction in the district and has frequently consented to or not contested venue in prior D.N.J. litigation.
  • Core Dispute: Plaintiff alleges that Defendant’s filing of an Abbreviated New Drug Application (ANDA) to market a generic version of Plaintiff’s anti-emetic drug Akynzeo® constitutes an act of infringement of ten U.S. patents.
  • Technical Context: The technology relates to pharmaceutical compounds and formulations used to prevent acute and delayed nausea and vomiting associated with cancer chemotherapy (CINV).
  • Key Procedural History: This action was initiated under the Hatch-Waxman Act following Defendant’s submission of ANDA No. 217374 to the FDA. The complaint was filed within 45 days of Plaintiff’s receipt of Defendant’s Paragraph IV certification notice letters, which asserted that the patents-in-suit are invalid, unenforceable, and/or will not be infringed by the proposed generic product. The patents-in-suit are listed in the FDA’s “Approved Drug Products with Therapeutic Equivalence Evaluations” (the Orange Book) as covering Akynzeo®.

Case Timeline

Date Event
2009-11-18 Priority Date for ’357 and ’297 Patents
2011-11-29 Priority Date for ’450, ’586, ’772, ’907, ’073, ’721, and ’698 Patents
2013-04-23 ’450 Patent Issued
2014-11-25 ’586 Patent Issued
2015-11-17 ’357 Patent Issued
2016-06-06 Priority Date for ’911 Patent
2016-08-02 ’772 Patent Issued
2018-03-06 ’907 Patent Issued
2018-04-19 Plaintiff's Akynzeo® (NDA No. 210493) First Approved by FDA
2019-02-19 ’073 Patent Issued
2020-04-21 ’911 Patent Issued
2020-07-21 ’721 Patent Issued
2020-11-10 ’297 Patent Issued
2022-04-26 ’698 Patent Issued
2022-06-02 Defendant Sends First Paragraph IV Notice Letter
2022-07-11 Defendant Sends Second Paragraph IV Notice Letter
2022-07-18 Complaint Filed

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

U.S. Patent No. 8,426,450 - "Substituted 4-Phenyl Pyridines Having Anti-Emetic Effect," issued April 23, 2013

The Invention Explained

  • Problem Addressed: The patent addresses the need for new neurokinin (NK₁) receptor antagonists to treat conditions such as emesis. (U.S. Patent No. 10,208,073, col. 1:25-47). Existing 4-phenyl-pyridine compounds, while effective, faced limitations in clinical usefulness due to issues like poor solubility or unfavorable pharmacokinetics. (U.S. Patent No. 10,208,073, col. 1:50-55).
  • The Patented Solution: The invention discloses a novel class of 4-phenyl-pyridine derivatives with enhanced physicochemical and biological properties, making them well-suited for antagonizing the NK₁ receptor. ('073 Patent, col. 2:5-9). Specifically, the patent claims the compound fosnetupitant, which is a water-soluble prodrug of the NK₁ antagonist netupitant. ('073 Patent, col. 15:40-16:20).
  • Technical Importance: Developing a water-soluble prodrug of an effective but less-soluble active moiety is a common strategy in pharmaceutical development to enable intravenous formulations, which can offer advantages in bioavailability and patient compliance in a clinical setting. (Compl. ¶12).

Key Claims at a Glance

  • The complaint alleges infringement of claims 1-3. (Compl. ¶35).
  • The asserted independent claim is Claim 1, which recites:
    • A compound which is 4-(5-(2-(3,5-bis(trifluoromethyl)phenyl)-N,2-dimethylpropanamido)-4-(o-tolyl)pyridin-2-yl)-1-methyl-1-((phosphonooxy)methyl)piperazin-1-ium (fosnetupitant), or a pharmaceutically acceptable salt thereof.

U.S. Patent No. 8,895,586 - "Methods of Treating Emesis," issued November 25, 2014

The Invention Explained

  • Problem Addressed: The patent addresses the medical need for treating emesis (vomiting), a condition modulated by the NK₁ receptor and associated with various pathological conditions, including as a side effect of cancer chemotherapy. (U.S. Patent No. 10,208,073, col. 1:25-30; col. 26:17-23).
  • The Patented Solution: The invention provides a method for treating emesis by administering a therapeutically effective amount of the fosnetupitant compound, or a salt thereof, to a subject. ('073 Patent, col. 2:28-34). The patent specifically contemplates use for chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV). ('073 Patent, col. 26:40-44).
  • Technical Importance: This patent claims the medical use of the novel compound, protecting a key therapeutic application and providing a basis for its inclusion in the FDA Orange Book for the approved drug product. (Compl. ¶24).

Key Claims at a Glance

  • The complaint alleges infringement of claims 1-21. (Compl. ¶44).
  • The asserted independent claim is Claim 1, which recites:
    • A method for treating emesis in a patient in need thereof,
    • comprising administering to said patient a therapeutically effective amount of
    • the compound 4-(5-(2-(3,5-bis(trifluoromethyl)phenyl)-N,2-dimethylpropanamido)-4-(o-tolyl)pyridin-2-yl)-1-methyl-1-((phosphonooxy)methyl)piperazin-1-ium, or a pharmaceutically acceptable salt thereof.

U.S. Patent No. 9,186,357 - "Compositions and Methods for Treating Centrally Mediated Nausea and Vomiting," issued November 17, 2015

  • Technology Synopsis: This patent addresses the treatment of CINV by claiming pharmaceutical compositions that combine an NK₁ antagonist (netupitant) with a 5-HT₃ antagonist (palonosetron). (Compl. ¶16; '357 Patent, Abstract). The combination is intended to provide broader anti-emetic coverage than either agent alone. ('357 Patent, col. 2:10-14).
  • Asserted Claims: Claims 4, 14-16, and 52-62. (Compl. ¶53).
  • Accused Features: Gland's ANDA product is an intravenous formulation containing both fosnetupitant (a prodrug of netupitant) and palonosetron. (Compl. ¶25, ¶49).

U.S. Patent No. 9,403,772 - "4-(5-(2-(3,5-Bis(Trifluoromethyl)Phenyl)-N,2-Dimethylpropanamido)-4-(O-Tolyl)Pyridin-2-yl)-1-Methyl-1-((Phosphonooxy)Methyl)Piperazin-1-ium as a Neurokinin Receptor Modulator," issued August 2, 2016

  • Technology Synopsis: This patent, part of the same family as the '450 patent, also claims the fosnetupitant compound. (Compl. ¶17). It further refines the claims around the specific chemical entity and its use as an NK₁ receptor modulator.
  • Asserted Claims: Claims 1-14. (Compl. ¶62).
  • Accused Features: Gland's ANDA product contains the claimed fosnetupitant compound. (Compl. ¶25, ¶58).

U.S. Patent No. 9,908,907 - "Substituted Piperaziniums for the Treatment of Emesis," issued March 6, 2018

  • Technology Synopsis: This patent claims methods of treating emesis by administering fosnetupitant. (Compl. ¶18). It is related to the '586 patent and further covers the therapeutic application of the compound.
  • Asserted Claims: Claims 1-6. (Compl. ¶71).
  • Accused Features: The proposed labeling for Gland's ANDA product will instruct for the administration of fosnetupitant to treat emesis, specifically CINV. (Compl. ¶13, ¶67).

U.S. Patent No. 10,208,073 - "Solution Comprising the Chloride Hydrochloride Salt of ... (Fosnetupitant) and Palonosetron Hydrochloride in Combination with Dexamethasone as a Neurokinin Receptor Modulator," issued February 19, 2019

  • Technology Synopsis: This patent claims a specific solution comprising the chloride hydrochloride salt of fosnetupitant, palonosetron hydrochloride, and dexamethasone. (Compl. ¶19). The claims cover a three-drug combination therapy for preventing CINV. ('073 Patent, Abstract).
  • Asserted Claims: Claims 1-13. (Compl. ¶80).
  • Accused Features: Gland's ANDA product contains fosnetupitant and palonosetron and is indicated for use in combination with dexamethasone to prevent CINV. (Compl. ¶13, ¶25, ¶76).

U.S. Patent No. 10,624,911 - "Physiologically Balanced Injectable Formulations of Fosnetupitant," issued April 21, 2020

  • Technology Synopsis: This patent claims specific injectable formulations of fosnetupitant that are "physiologically balanced." (Compl. ¶20). The claims focus on formulation parameters such as pH, the presence of specific excipients like disodium edetate and mannitol, and the concentrations of the active ingredients, designed to ensure stability and safety. ('911 Patent, Abstract; col. 7:1-14).
  • Asserted Claims: Claims 1, 3, 8-11, 14, and 19-21. (Compl. ¶89).
  • Accused Features: Gland's ANDA Product is an injectable formulation containing fosnetupitant and palonosetron, which allegedly meets the claimed formulation parameters. (Compl. ¶25, ¶85).

U.S. Patent No. 10,717,721 - "Substituted Piperaziniums for the Treatment of Emesis," issued July 21, 2020

  • Technology Synopsis: Similar to the '586 and '907 patents, this patent claims methods for treating emesis by administering the fosnetupitant compound. (Compl. ¶21). It represents continued prosecution within the patent family to protect the therapeutic method.
  • Asserted Claims: Claim 1. (Compl. ¶98).
  • Accused Features: Gland's ANDA Product is intended for use in treating emesis, per its proposed labeling. (Compl. ¶13, ¶94).

U.S. Patent No. 10,828,297 - "Compositions and Methods for Treating Centrally Mediated Nausea and Vomiting," issued November 10, 2020

  • Technology Synopsis: This patent is related to the '357 patent and claims methods of treating CINV by administering a combination of netupitant and palonosetron. (Compl. ¶22). It specifically claims methods of achieving "complete response" and preventing nausea during the acute and delayed phases of CINV. ('297 Patent, col. 22:45-53).
  • Asserted Claims: Claims 1-23. (Compl. ¶107).
  • Accused Features: Gland's ANDA product contains a combination of fosnetupitant and palonosetron, and its intended use is for treating CINV. (Compl. ¶25, ¶103).

U.S. Patent No. 11,312,698 - "Fosnetupitant Chloride Hydrochloride Having Improved Stability," issued April 26, 2022

  • Technology Synopsis: This patent claims the chloride hydrochloride salt of fosnetupitant itself, characterized by having improved stability. (Compl. ¶23). The invention is directed to a specific salt form of the active drug substance that is "tremendously resistant to decoupling" and degradation. ('698 Patent, col. 15:48-53).
  • Asserted Claims: Claims 1-6. (Compl. ¶116).
  • Accused Features: Gland's ANDA Product contains fosnetupitant chloride hydrochloride, which allegedly has the claimed stability characteristics. (Compl. ¶25, ¶112).

III. The Accused Instrumentality

  • Product Identification: Defendant’s ANDA Product, a generic version of Akynzeo® for intravenous administration (Compl. ¶12, ¶25).
  • Functionality and Market Context: The accused product is a proposed generic drug for intravenous infusion, supplied in single-dose vials. (Compl. ¶25). It contains 235 mg of fosnetupitant chloride hydrochloride and 0.25 mg of palonosetron hydrochloride per 20 mL vial. (Compl. ¶25). Like the branded product Akynzeo®, it is intended for use in combination with dexamethasone for the prevention of acute and delayed nausea and vomiting associated with cancer chemotherapy. (Compl. ¶13). The filing of the ANDA signifies Defendant’s intent to market and sell this generic product in the United States before the expiration of the patents-in-suit. (Compl. ¶27).

IV. Analysis of Infringement Allegations

No probative visual evidence provided in complaint.

’450 Patent Infringement Allegations

Claim Element (from Independent Claim 1) Alleged Infringing Functionality Complaint Citation Patent Citation
A compound which is 4-(5-(2-(3,5-bis(trifluoromethyl)phenyl)-N,2-dimethylpropanamido)-4-(o-tolyl)pyridin-2-yl)-1-methyl-1-((phosphonooxy)methyl)piperazin-1-ium, or a pharmaceutically acceptable salt thereof. Defendant's ANDA Product is a pharmaceutical composition that contains 235 mg of fosnetupitant chloride hydrochloride, which is a pharmaceutically acceptable salt of the claimed compound. ¶25, ¶31 '073 Patent, col. 7:10-27

’586 Patent Infringement Allegations

Claim Element (from Independent Claim 1) Alleged Infringing Functionality Complaint Citation Patent Citation
A method for treating emesis in a patient in need thereof, The proposed labeling for Defendant’s ANDA Product will instruct medical professionals and patients to use the product for the prevention of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting, which is a form of emesis. ¶13, ¶41 '073 Patent, col. 26:17-23
comprising administering to said patient a therapeutically effective amount of... [fosnetupitant], or a pharmaceutically acceptable salt thereof. The ANDA Product contains a therapeutically effective amount of fosnetupitant chloride hydrochloride (235 mg) and will be administered to patients according to the instructions in its proposed labeling. ¶25, ¶41 '073 Patent, col. 28:1-18
  • Identified Points of Contention:
    • Scope Questions: The complaint notes that Defendant’s notice letters did not identify any factual basis for non-infringement of claims 1-3 of the ’450 Patent or claims 1-21 of the ’586 Patent (Compl. ¶35, ¶44). This suggests that for these core compound and method patents, the dispute may center on Defendant's assertions of invalidity rather than a technical non-infringement argument.
    • Technical Questions: For the patents claiming specific formulations, combinations, and stable forms (e.g., ’911, ’073, ’698 patents), a key question will be whether Defendant’s ANDA Product meets the specific claim limitations. For example, does Defendant’s formulation have the exact excipients and pH claimed in the ’911 patent, or does its active pharmaceutical ingredient possess the specific stability profile claimed in the ’698 patent? The complaint does not provide sufficient detail for analysis of these specific elements.

V. Key Claim Terms for Construction

The complaint does not provide sufficient detail for analysis of potential claim construction disputes. However, based on the nature of the asserted method claims, practitioners may anticipate a focus on the following term:

  • The Term: "therapeutically effective amount" (from '586 Patent, Claim 1)
  • Context and Importance: This term is central to the method claims, as infringement requires that the amount of fosnetupitant in the accused product be effective for treating emesis. Its definition will determine whether the 235 mg dosage in Gland's product meets the claim limitation.
  • Intrinsic Evidence for Interpretation:
    • Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: The patent specification describes the invention as providing compounds that are "particularly well-suited for antagonizing the NK₁ receptor" generally, which could support a broad interpretation that any amount producing such an effect is "effective." ('073 Patent, col. 2:7-9).
    • Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: The specification discloses specific dosage ranges for intravenous administration, such as "from about 10 mg to about 200 mg" or "about 100 mg," based on the weight of the netupitant component. ('073 Patent, col. 28:10-18). A defendant may argue that these specific disclosures limit the scope of what is considered a "therapeutically effective amount" to the disclosed ranges.

VI. Other Allegations

  • Indirect Infringement: The complaint alleges that upon FDA approval, the Defendant's manufacture, use, or sale of its ANDA Product "for use in accordance with its proposed labeling would infringe and/or induce and/or contribute to the infringement" of the asserted method claims (e.g., Compl. ¶41, ¶50, ¶59). The basis for inducement is the allegation that the product's label will instruct medical professionals and patients to perform the patented methods of treatment.
  • Willful Infringement: The complaint alleges that Defendant was aware of the existence of the patents-in-suit and knew that the submission of its ANDA was an act of infringement (e.g., Compl. ¶33-34, ¶42-43). The prayer for relief requests a judgment that the case is "exceptional" and that Plaintiff is entitled to attorney fees pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 285, which can be awarded in cases of willful infringement or litigation misconduct. (Compl. p. 22, ¶E).

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

  • A central issue will be one of portfolio resilience: Helsinn has asserted a "picket fence" of ten patents covering the fosnetupitant prodrug, its specific salt form, combination therapies with palonosetron and dexamethasone, specific injectable formulations, and methods of use. The case will likely test whether Gland can successfully challenge the validity of or establish non-infringement for every asserted claim across this entire portfolio, or if at least one patent will be sufficient to block generic market entry.
  • A key question will be one of infringement versus validity: The complaint states that Gland's pre-suit notice letters offered no factual basis for non-infringement of the foundational compound and method patents. This suggests the primary legal battle may focus on Gland's invalidity arguments (e.g., obviousness, anticipation, lack of enablement) rather than on technical distinctions between the proposed generic and the claimed inventions.
  • An evidentiary question will be one of formulation equivalence: For the patents directed to specific formulations and stable forms (e.g., the ’911 and ’698 patents), the dispute will likely turn on detailed factual evidence. Does Gland’s specific manufacturing process, choice of excipients, and the resulting crystalline structure of its API fall within the precise boundaries of what Helsinn has claimed as its "physiologically balanced" and "improved stability" inventions?