EN | ES | DE | FR | IT | 日本語 | 한국어 | 中文

Final Decision Reached in Initial Insulin IPR Proceeding

How to Allocate Resources to Intellectual Property as a Start-Up
January 11, 2019
Buyer Beware: Secret Sales May Result in Subsequent Patent Invalidity
January 27, 2019
Show all

Final Decision Reached in Initial Insulin IPR Proceeding

 

By: Katie Rubino

 


 

 

On December 12th, 2018 the U.S. Patent and Trademark Appeal Board (PTAB) came to an agreement in an inter partes review (IPR) proceedings. The proceeding focused on claims brought by Mylan against two patents, U.S. Patent Nos. 7,476,652 and 7,713,930 owned by Sanofi for Lantus (insulin glargine injection) 100 Units/mL. Lantus is a long acting basal insulin used by both Type 1 and Type 2 diabetics to control their blood sugar and Hemoglobin A1C.

Ways to challenge patents were recently modified by the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act (AIA) of 2011, which allows for options in challenging the validity of a competitors’ patents while avoiding the significant cost of litigation. Challenges before the PTAB include post grant review (PGR), IPR and covered business method review (CBM; available only to patents directed to covered business methods).

PGR allows for a patent to be challenged on any ground of invalidity that could otherwise be asserted as a defense in patent litigation. For example, PGR allows a patent to be challenged under ⸹101 patentable subject matter, ⸹102 novelty, ⸹103 obviousness, and ⸹112 indefiniteness. While PGR allows for a broad scope of challengeable subject matter, such a challenge must be brought within nine months after a patent has been issued. PGR can be filed by a person who is not the patent owner and who has not previously filed a civil action challenging the validity of a claim of the patent. The challenger must provide sufficient evidence to demonstrate that it is more likely than not that at least one claim is unpatentable. The basis of the challenge is not limited to patents and printed publications, but can allow for any form of prior art. A final decision made in a PGR is appealable to the Federal Circuit.

IPR proceedings are utilized to review the patentability of one or more claims in a patent based on ⸹102 and ⸹103 challenges, including novelty and obviousness. IPR is more limited in that only patents or printed publications may be utilized to demonstrate that at least one claim is unpatentable. IPR may not be filed until the later of nine months after a patent has been issued or after a PGR proceeding has terminated. IPR can be initiated by a person who is not the patent owner and has not previously filed a civil action challenging the validity of a claim of the patent. The PTAB may grant an IPR petition when there is a reasonable likelihood that the petitioner will prevail as to at least one challenged claim. A final decision made in an IPR is appealable to the Federal Circuit.

Proceeding Time to File Who Can Initiate Basis for Challenge Standard of Proof Ability to Appeal to Federal Circuit
Post-Grant Review Up to 9 months after issuance of patent Any person who is not the patent owner 101, 102, 103, and 112 More likely than not Yes can appeal decision to Federal Circuit
Inter-Partes Review Later of 9 months after issuance of patent or date of termination of post-grant review Any person who is not the patent owner 102, 103 (patents and printed publications only) Reasonable likelihood that petitioner will prevail Yes can appeal decision to Federal Circuit

 

A review of petitions filed at the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) indicates that since September 16th, 2012 when PGR and IPR’s were enacted by the AIA, 9,522 petitions have been filed. Of those, 8,803 or 92% have been filed for IPR. 147 or 2% have been filed for PGR and 572 or 6% have been filed for covered business method patents. Over the past 12 months, the number of IPR’s filed have continued to increase, with 115 filed in October 2018 and 212 filed in November 2018. From September 16th, 2012 to November 30th, 2018, 730 proceedings were filed pertaining to bio/pharma art units. Of those 730 filed, 435 or 60% were initiated by the PTAB and allowed to proceed to trial.

 

Petition Type # Petitions Filed Since AIA % of Petitions Filed Since AIA
IPR 8,803 92%
PGR 147 2%
CBM 572 6%

 

 

 

Source: USPTO (# of petitions filed since enactment of AIA)

In the present IPR petition, the PTAB announced that IPR proceedings would be instituted and proceed to trial on the two applicable patents on December 14th, 2017, after Mylan first initiated two IPR proceedings on June 9th, 2017.

In regards to U.S. Patent No. 7,476,652 the claims were directed to the combination of insulin glargine with at least one surfactant selected from polysorbates and poloxamers in an acidic formulation. The PTAB found all claims of the ‘652 patent to be unpatentable based on six different grounds of invalidity.

In regards to U.S. Patent No. 7,713,930 the claims were directed to the combination of insulin glargine with at least one surfactant selected from esters and ethers of polyhydric alcohols in an acidic formulation. The PTAB found all claims of the ‘930 patent to be unpatentable based on eight different grounds of invalidity.

One such rationale for the PTAB’s invalidation of both patents had to do with obviousness. The PTAB found that insulin glargine was widely known in the prior art, even based on some of Sanofi’s own earlier formulations of insulin glargine. Furthermore, combining insulin glargine in combination with a surfactant had been previously taught in the prior art. The PTAB also found that because both the ‘652 and ‘930 patents explained that insulins had a known tendency to aggregate in the presence of hydrophobic substances, that a person of ordinary skill in the art would have had a reasonable expectation of success in adding a surfactant in combination with insulin glargine.

Further, prior art had taught many examples of stabilization of insulin glargine and other peptides using surfactants. During the IPR proceeding, Sanofi argued that molecules such as peptides and protein molecules are unpredictable and thus picking a surfactant to assist in stabilization is nonobvious. However, the PTAB dismissed Sanofi’s arguments with respect to nonobviousness.

In addition, Sanofi pointed to the commercial success of its insulin glargine products as further evidence of nonobviousness. By 2017, U.S. sales of Sanofi’s inulin glargine products were valued at approximately $2.6 billion, accounting for approximately 1/3 of all sales of long acting insulin therapies in the U.S. The PTAB dismissed these arguments, finding that Sanofi’s commercial success was of minimal probative value. Further, Sanofi failed to investigate other patents that embraced “the same technologies.” The PTAB found that Sanofi could have minimized of these obviousness type rejections by having entered into licensing agreements with other companies engaging in similar technologies.

Looking ahead, it appears that Sanofi has another uphill battle, as Mylan has filed ten additional IPR’s related to five of Sanofi’s pen type insulin glargine patents. These additional IPR’s were filed by Mylan on September 10th, 2018 and as of now, the PTAB has not yet granted a decision as to whether these proceedings will be initiated and proceed to trial. Should these additional IPR proceedings move forward, it will be interesting to see what arguments Sanofi may use to try to overcome the obviousness arguments previously presented.

Ask a Question


25 Comments

  1. This text is worth everyone’s attention. Where can I find out
    more?

  2. It’s amazing for me to have a website, which is beneficial in support of my know-how.
    thanks admin

  3. It’s amazing in support of me to have a website, which is good in support of my
    experience. thanks admin

  4. You are so cool! I don’t believe I have read something like this before.

    So wonderful to find another person with a few original thoughts on this subject matter.
    Really.. thanks for starting this up. This web site is one thing that’s needed on the internet, someone with a bit of originality!

  5. It’s awesome for me to have a web site, which is helpful
    in favor of my knowledge. thanks admin

  6. Today, while I was at work, my sister stole my iphone and
    tested to see if it can survive a 30 foot
    drop, just so she can be a youtube sensation. My iPad is now
    broken and she has 83 views. I know this is completely off topic but I had to share it with someone!

  7. Excellent blog here! Also your website loads up very fast!
    What web host are you using? Can I get your affiliate link to your host?
    I wish my site loaded up as fast as yours lol

  8. I’ve been surfing online more than 3 hours today,
    yet I never found any interesting article like yours.
    It is pretty worth enough for me. Personally, if all webmasters and bloggers made good content as you did, the internet will
    be a lot more useful than ever before.

  9. Nice respond in return of this question with firm arguments and telling everything concerning that.

  10. Today, while I was at work, my sister stole my iphone and
    tested to see if it can survive a twenty five foot drop, just so she can be a youtube sensation. My apple ipad is now broken and she has 83 views.
    I know this is totally off topic but I had to share it with
    someone!

  11. tinyurl.com says:

    Hi, i read your blog from time to time and i own a
    similar one and i was just wondering if you get a lot of spam comments?
    If so how do you stop it, any plugin or anything you can recommend?
    I get so much lately it’s driving me mad so any support is very much appreciated.

  12. Amazing! Its really amazing article, I have got much clear idea on the topic of from this paragraph.

  13. tinyurl.com says:

    Superb blog you have here but I was wondering
    if you knew of any message boards that cover the same topics
    discussed in this article? I’d really love to be a part of community where I can get feed-back from other knowledgeable
    people that share the same interest. If you have any recommendations, please let me know.

    Kudos!

  14. tinyurl.com says:

    I was suggested this web site by my cousin. I’m not sure whether
    this post is written by him as no one else know such detailed
    about my problem. You are amazing! Thanks!

  15. tinyurl.com says:

    Greetings! Very helpful advice within this article! It’s the little changes that
    will make the greatest changes. Thanks a
    lot for sharing!

  16. tinyurl.com says:

    I loved as much as you will receive carried out
    right here. The sketch is tasteful, your authored subject matter stylish.
    nonetheless, you command get got an shakiness over that you wish be
    delivering the following. unwell unquestionably come further formerly
    again as exactly the same nearly very often inside case you shield
    this increase.

  17. Right here is the perfect blog for everyone who wants to
    find out about this topic. You understand so much its almost tough to
    argue with you (not that I personally will need to…HaHa).
    You certainly put a brand new spin on a topic that’s
    been discussed for years. Great stuff, just great!

  18. Appreciate this post. Let me try it out.

  19. Pretty! This has been an extremely wonderful post.
    Many thanks for providing these details.

  20. Heya i’m for the first time here. I found this board and
    I in finding It truly helpful & it helped me out much.
    I hope to present one thing back and aid others
    like you aided me.

  21. I was very happy to discover this web site. I need to to thank
    you for ones time for this fantastic read!! I definitely really liked every bit
    of it and i also have you book-marked to check
    out new things on your website.

  22. Excellent goods from you, man. I have understand your stuff
    previous to and you’re just too excellent. I really like
    what you have acquired here, certainly like what you are saying and the way in which you say it.
    You make it enjoyable and you still care for to keep it smart.
    I can not wait to read far more from you. This is actually
    a wonderful site.

  23. Simply desire to say your article is as amazing.
    The clarity on your post is just great and that i could think you’re an expert on this
    subject. Fine along with your permission allow me to grasp your feed to stay updated with
    impending post. Thanks 1,000,000 and please carry on the rewarding work.

  24. Hello, I enjoy reading all of your article.
    I wanted to write a little comment to support you.

  25. hello!,I like your writing very a lot! share we communicate more about
    your post on AOL? I need an expert in this space to unravel my problem.
    Maybe that is you! Having a look ahead to look you.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *