API and IP Newsletter
Contents
List of Off-Patent, Off-Exclusivity Drugs (Capsules) without an Approved Generic
Moderna takes first win in UK trials with Pfizer and BioNTech
Local division Düsseldorf grants first ever injunction against bathtub manufacturer
List of Off-Patent, Off-Exclusivity Drugs (Capsules) without an Approved Generic
Last week, we discussed the list of off-patent, off-exclusivity drugs published by FDA.
In short, the FDA maintains a list of approved new drug application (NDA) drug products that are no longer protected by patents or exclusivities, and for which the FDA has not approved an abbreviated new drug application (ANDA) referencing that NDA product.
The FDA updates this list every six months (in June and December). More details could be found here.
Also, last week’s API and IP Newsletter, we had identified tablet dosage forms from the FDA lists, where there’re approved NDA drug products that are no longer protected by patents or exclusivities, and for which the FDA has not approved an ANDA.
This week we looked at Capsule dosage forms. The list for capsules is as below.
We tried to analyse products which would be of interest to the generics for their potential development project. Some of our observations are as below.
Few of above products should qualify for GCT exclusivity. We covered information about CGT exclusivity in our last week’s write-up.
General information
Moderna takes first win in UK trials with Pfizer and BioNTech
The UK High Court found Pfizer and BioNTech are infringing a Moderna patent with their COVID-19 vaccine Comirnaty and owe the US company damages. However, the court also declared a second Moderna patent invalid.
News here
Local division Düsseldorf grants first ever injunction against bathtub manufacturer
German bathtub manufacturer Bette faces the UPC's first ever injunction in an infringement case. The company may no longer sell shower trays in seven UPC countries. Germany, the domestic market of plaintiff Kaldewei and high-end competitor Bette, is not affected.
News here
Intellectual Property
Abbott Vs SiBio- Continuous Glucose Monitoring device
This is regarding European patent EP2713879, relates to analyte sensor devices, connections, and methods. This patent is issued to Abbott and would be valid till 2032.
Essentially this granted patent would cover continuous glucose monitoring (“CGM”) device. Abbott has been a developer, manufacturer and marketer of continuous glucose monitoring (“CGM”) devices since 2007. Its series of devices is called FreeStyle Libre. Since 2014, these devices have comprised an applicator (i.e. an insertion device), an on-body unit consisting of an analyte sensor (for glucose) and sensor electronics as an integrated unit, and a display device (such as a reader or smartphone) with proprietary software.
The Chinese newcomer SiBio and its distribution partner Umedwings, are relatively young players in the CGM market. SiBio had launched its SiBio-KS1 CKM product last year.
Abbott filed three PI (Preliminary Injunction) proceedings against SiBio and Umedwings in April 2024 in Europe, two with the local division The Hague and one at the local division Düsseldorf. Abbott is also taking action against various SiBio companies, Umedwings and other European distributors across Europe.
According to Abbott, SiBio utilizes the technology disclosed in the granted patent EP2713879.
Abbott is the main supplier of CGM products in the Contracting Member States. In Europe, Abbott serves over 1.3 million patients with its FreeStyle Libre products and has a market share of approximately 80%.
Sibio also manufactures CGM systems. Since 2021, Sibio has been marketing a CGM device in China. Recently, at the end of 2023, Sibio entered the European market with its CGM device, called GS1.
Umedwings and together with Sibio importing GS1 device in Europe.
A Chinese company, Shenzhen Sibionics Co. Ltd, filed a Protective Letter concerning the patent on 29 September 2023. In the protective letter, the company argued that it (or a member of the group) would not infringe the patent by providing the GS1 devices in the Contracting Member States. It is the understanding of this Court that Shenzhen Sibionics Co. and Sibio Technology Limited belong to the same group of companies.
Finally, Abbott lodged the application for a preliminary injunction and other provisional measures on 20 March 2024 at the UPC Local Division The Hague.
Abbott contends that its patent is valid and that both independent claim 1 and dependent claim 4 of EP2713879 are infringed by Sibio, among others through the offering for sale of the GS1 Devices on Sibio’s website sibionicsshop.com, which is targeted at Europe.
Abbott therefore requested that the Court, for the Contracting Member States in which the patent is in force to grant a preliminary injunction for direct infringement of the patent by prohibiting Sibio.
In their objection, Sibio c.s. did not rely on the defence presented in the protective letter, nor did they challenge the validity of the patent or the alleged infringement. They also did not dispute the urgency of the application or the competence of the court. Instead, the Defendants Sibio and Umedwings provided a unilateral cease-and-desist declaration with certain undertakings concerning the withdrawal of the GS1 device from the market in Germany, France and The Netherlands.
In response to criticism from Abbott, Sibio c.s. amended their cease-and-desist declaration on 15 May 2024. Sibio c.s. argued that the application has therefore become devoid of purpose and that there is no longer any need to adjudicate on it.
Decision:
The court granted a preliminary injunction for direct infringement of European patent EP2713879, prohibiting Sibio and Umedwings , individually and jointly, from infringing this patent, with immediate effect after service of this order, by making, offering and / or placing on the market the GS1 Device, or importing or storing the GS1 Device for the commercial purposes in accordance with claim 1 or 4 of European patent EP2713879 in Germany, France, The Netherlands and Ireland.
The Court ordered the Defendants Sibio and Umedwings to comply with the orders, subject to a recurring penalty payment of up to EUR 10,000.00 for each violation of, or noncompliance with, the order, or up to EUR 100,000.00 for each day, or part of a day counting as an entire day, that the violation or non-compliance continues.
Decision here
