In ongoing litigation over Celltrion and Pfizer’s infliximab biosimilar, Inflectra, a Massachusetts district court has granted Celltrion’s motion for leave to file a motion for summary judgment of non-infringement.
In ongoing litigation over Celltrion and Pfizer’s infliximab biosimilar, Inflectra, a Massachusetts district court has granted Celltrion’s motion for leave to file a motion for summary judgment of non-infringement.
Janssen, maker of the reference infliximab, Remicade, has claimed that the biosimilar developer infringed on a patent, which covers chemically defined media compositions for the culture of eukaryotic cells, in producing Inflectra.
In support of its motion, Celltrion said that Janssen’s patent is not new and that the court should terminate the case based on ensnarement, or the principle that prior art (elements of patented information that are already publicly available) restricts the scope of what the alleging party can assert under the doctrine of equivalents (a legal rule holding that, while a product may not literally infringe on a patented invention, the product may have elements that are equivalent to those described in a patent).
According to Celltrion, if Janssen wants to claim that Celltrion infringed on Janssen’s patent through the doctrine of equivalents, Janssen should have the burden of proving that the scope of equivalency does not encompass any prior art related to the patent.
“There is every reason for the Court to consider ensnarement on a motion for summary judgment” in this case, according to the motion, especially given the fact that GlaxoSmithKline has already disclosed the same ingredients, at concentrations that overlap heavily with Janssen’s patented ingredients and concentrations, elsewhere. These overlapping ranges establish a case for the obviousness of Janssen’s invention, says Celltrion.
The motion proposes a deadline of May 10, 2018, for Janssen to file its opposition, after which Celltrion would file its reply brief by May 28, 2018.
In October of 2017, the court denied Celltrion’s motion to dismiss this case for lack of standing.
President Trump Signs Executive Order to Bring Down Drug Prices
April 16th 2025To help bring down sky-high drug prices, President Donald Trump signed an executive order pushing for faster biosimilar development, more transparency, and tougher rules on pharmacy benefit managers—aiming to save billions and make meds more affordable for everyone.
Will the FTC Be More PBM-Friendly Under a Second Trump Administration?
February 23rd 2025On this episode of Not So Different, we explore the Federal Trade Commission’s (FTC) second interim report on pharmacy benefit managers (PBMs) with Joe Wisniewski from Turquoise Health, discussing key issues like preferential reimbursement, drug pricing transparency, biosimilars, shifting regulations, and how a second Trump administration could reshape PBM practices.
Experts Pressure Congress to Remove Roadblocks for Biosimilars
April 12th 2025Lawmakers and expert witnesses emphasized the potential of biosimilars to lower health care costs by overcoming barriers like pharmacy benefit manager practices, limited awareness, and regulatory delays to improve access and competition in chronic disease management during a recent congressional hearing.
Biosimilars Policy Roundup for September 2024—Podcast Edition
October 6th 2024On this episode of Not So Different, we discuss the FDA's approval of a new biosimilar for treating retinal conditions, which took place in September 2024 alongside other major industry developments, including ongoing legal disputes and broader trends in market dynamics and regulatory challenges.
BioRationality: Commemorating the 15th Anniversary of the BPCIA
April 8th 2025Affirming that analytical characterization is often sufficient for biosimilar approval, minimizing unnecessary clinical testing, and enhancing FDA-led education to counter stakeholder misconceptions are key recommendations put forth in this opinion piece by Sarfaraz K. Niazi, PhD.