Par v. Novartis AG, Breckenridge v. Novartis AG, Roxane v. Novartis AG

Par v. Novartis AG, Breckenridge v. Novartis AG, Roxane v. Novartis AG

P.T.A.B. (2016)

Fitzpatrick Successfully Opposes Joinder Motions And IPR Institution On Behalf Of Novartis AG

On October 27, 2016, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (Board) issued decisions denying inter partes review (IPR) petitions and joinder motions filed by Par Pharmaceutical, Inc, Roxane Laboratories, Inc. and Breckenridge Pharmaceutical, Inc., seeking to enlarge the scope of a pending IPR, Par v. Novartis AG, IPR2016-00084, by challenging an additional patent claim.  After reviewing the parties’ written submissions, the Board agreed with Novartis that joinder would unduly complicate the pending IPR proceeding, and that there was no justification for not challenging the additional claim earlier.  As a result, the Board denied the joinder motions and declined to institute the IPRs as to the new patent claim.

The patent at issue in these IPR proceedings is Novartis’s U.S. Patent No. 5,665,772, which covers Novartis’s Zortress® (everolimus) and Afinitor® (everolimus) products.  The IPR proceedings at issue are IPR2016-00084, IPR2016-01023, IPR2016-01059, IPR2016-01102 and IPR2016-01103.

Novartis was represented in these IPR proceedings by Fitzpatrick attorneys Christina Schwarz, Christopher E. Loh, Nicholas N. Kallas, Raymond R. Mandra and Laura Fishwick.