Amgen, maker of the brand-name pegfilgrastim (Neulasta), and Mylan, which partnered with Biocon to develop a biosimilar (Fulphila), have entered a joint status report in the District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania.
Amgen, maker of the brand-name pegfilgrastim (Neulasta), and Mylan, which partnered with Biocon to develop a biosimilar (Fulphila), have entered a joint status report in the District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania. In the status report, they agree that Amgen cannot maintain a claim of infringement against Mylan with respect to US Patent Number 8,273,707, which covers a process for purifying proteins by mixing a protein preparation with a solution involving 2 salts.
This latest development stems from an earlier decision in another case related to the same patent; in March 2018, a Delaware court dismissed a lawsuit brought by Amgen over a different biosimilar developer’s alleged infringement of this same patent; in that case, Amgen alleged that Coherus BioSciences infringed on its patent because Coherus’ biosimilar pegfilgrastim, later approved as Udenyca, mixed salts that, in combinations, were equivalent to Amgen’s patented combinations. According to the court, Amgen had previously acknowledged that Coherus did not literally infringe on the patent.
Later, in July 2019, the federal circuit affirmed that decision, saying that Amgen “clearly and unmistakably surrendered salt combinations other than the particular combinations recited in the claims.”
In this month’s joint status report in the case concerning Fulphila, the parties write that, in light of the court’s precedential decision in Amgen v Coherus BioSiences, Agmen and Mylan agree that Amgen can no longer maintain its claim related to this patent.
The stipulation has no impact on the claims of another patent—US Patent Number 9,643,997—that Amgen alleges Mylan has infringed. This patent covers processes for purifying proteins expressed in nonmammalian systems.
Mylan, however, requested that the court extend a stay on discovery related to the latter patent for an additional 30 days. Last month, another biosimilar developer, Sandoz, filed a response to Amgen’s petition for a rehearing of Amgen v Sandoz, a case in which the federal circuit sided with Sandoz related to alleged infringement of the patent. In light of the pending decision in that matter, the court agreed to stay further action in this case pending further order of the court.
From Amjevita to Zarxio: A Decade of US Biosimilar Approvals
March 6th 2025Since the FDA’s groundbreaking approval of Zarxio in 2015, the US biosimilars market has surged to 67 approvals across 18 originators—though the journey has been anything but smooth, with adoption facing hurdles along the way.
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.
Biosimilars in America: Overcoming Barriers and Maximizing Impact
July 21st 2024Join us as we explore the complexities of the US biosimilars market, discussing legislative influences, payer and provider adoption factors, and strategies to overcome industry challenges with expert insights from Kyle Noonan, PharmD, MS, value & access strategy manager at Cencora.
The Banking of Biosimilars: Insights From a Leading Health Economist
February 4th 2025Biosimilars have the potential to reduce health care costs and expand patient access, but economic and policy barriers affect adoption, explored James D. Chambers, PhD, MPharm, MSc, associate professor at the Tufts Medical Center Institute for Clinical Research and Health Policy Studies, in an interview.