Markman Advisors
Patent Valuation, Monetization and Investments

Blog

Markman Advisors Patent Blog

How will Oil States impact VirnetX? Will VirnetX's damages be increased to $1.5B?

Our earlier post on VirnetX’s recent $502M jury verdict commended the company and its counsel on an incredible win, but nevertheless pointed out that it might be for naught.  The patents asserted in the trial for the $502M damages currently stand invalid pursuant to petitions for inter pares re-examination and inter partes review.  But what about Oil States?  The case is currently pending before the Supreme Court, and it addresses the constitutionality of petitions for inter partes review (IPR).  The case has already heard oral argument, and a decision is expected imminently.  Some commentators have suggested that if the Supreme Court holds IPRs unconstitutional, then that will vacate the invalidity decisions of VirnetX’s patents from the PTAB, and nothing will finally stand in the way of VirnetX’s damages.  What are the considerations that may keep alive VirnetX's prospect of collecting damages?

Read More
3 Takeaways from Samsung's Big Antisuit Injunction Win Against Huawei...

One of the hottest smartphone patent battles still raging is the one between China's Huawei and South Korea's Samsung. A true patent world war, with cases filed in Huawei's hometown of Szenzhen and good old Northern District of California, alleging various violations of 3G and 4G standard-essential patents owned by both companies, breach of contract claims relating to a failure to follow the FRAND licensing regime, and requests for injunctions aplenty. First blood went to Huawei, with a victory in the Szenzhen trial court (appeal pending) resulting in the issuance of an injunction, which, if enforced, could result in a shutdown of Samsung's formidable China-based smartphone manufacturing capacity -- bad news for any prospective buyers of the Galaxy S9 for example. Seeking immediate help from the ostensibly friendlier US-based court, Samsung moved for an antisuit injunction to stop Huawei from enforcing the injunction Huawei earned in China. Now that Samsung's motion was granted, it is a good time to consider 3 immediate takeaways from this important decision.

Read More
Markman Advisors
How important is Celgene’s latest Revlimid® suit against Dr. Reddy’s over REMS patents?

In a slightly new wrinkle in Celgene’s recent Revlimid® saga, Celgene ($CELG) has commenced another suit against Dr. Reddy’s ($RDY).  (This is the third patent lawsuit connected to Dr. Reddy’s proposed generic for Revlimid®.)  In the most recent suit, Celgene asserts five new patents (the ‘720, ‘977, ‘784, ‘866 and ‘531).  The suit was commenced on April 13, 2018 in the federal court in New Jersey, where the other Revlimid® suits are currently pending.  What’s this suit all about?

Read More
3 Takeaways from Oracle's Big Win in the Federal Circuit over Google...

IP decisions don't get bigger than the one handed down by the Federal Circuit yesterday in the long-running dispute between Oracle and Google over Google's use of Java code in developing Android. The case will continue -- with a damages trial at a time TBD, once the appeals of this appeals court decision are exhausted -- and will continue garnering significant interest from IP lawyers, software companies, and investors. Nothing like the prospect of a multi-billion dollar damages award to attract eyeballs. Now that Google's key defense -- fair use -- has been rejected by the CAFC, it is a good time to consider 3 immediate takeaways from this important decision.

Read More
Why was the Markman hearing cancelled in Celgene’s Revlimid® patent case against Dr. Reddy’s?

On March 23, Celgene and Dr. Reddy’s informed the Court that they jointly have resolved the single pending claim construction dispute—namely, the construction of the word “crystalline” within the two asserted polymorph patents.  What does this mean for the case?

Read More
What is Regeneron’s exposure from Novartis’ patent case against blockbuster Eylea®?

Novartis has filed a patent lawsuit against Regeneron seeking damages for sales of Eylea® and Zaltrap®.  On March 19, 2018, Novartis sued Regeneron in the Southern District of New York, White Plains Division, for infringing U.S. Patent No. 5,688,688.  The ‘688 patent claims gene expression constructs for the expression of polypeptides in mammalian cells.  How strong is Novartis’ case, and what is Regeneron’s exposure?

Read More
What is the status of Amgen’s PCSK9 patent lawsuit against Regeneron?

Regeneron ($REGN) and Sanofi released positive topline results from their ODYSSEY clinical trial Praluent®.  In addition was the announcement that prices for Praluent® may be cut.  Investors who may have grown skeptical with the new PCSK9-inhibitor class may now be interested again, which may include the pending patent lawsuit between Amgen ($AMGN) and Regeneron.  What is happening in the case?

Read More
Coherus denied institution on Enbrel® IPRs – how does that affect Sandoz?

The PTAB has denied institution of two IPRs filed by Coherus Biosciences against patents covering Enbrel®’s proteins, the ‘182 and ‘522 patents.  The IPRs were not filed by Sandoz, but they will most likely affect Sandoz.  Sandoz already has FDA approval to market Erelzi®, which is its biosimilar for Enbrel®.  And Sandoz is going to trial against Amgen in April.  How do Coherus IPR decisions affect Sandoz's decision to launch at risk?  Or to settle with Amgen?

Read More
Is J&J's Remicade® part of the "rigged" system claimed by FDA's Gottlieb? Pfizer's Inflectra® antitrust suit has the answer.

FDA’s Commissioner Scott Gottlieb said today that a “rigged” system between drug firms and insurers is stifling entry for less-expensive biosimilars.  Gottlieb stated that certain payment arrangements “raise another, perhaps even more insidious barrier to biosimilars taking root in the U.S., and gaining appropriate market share.”  Is J&J’s exclusionary contract scheme to discourage competition with Pfizer’s biosimilar for Remicade® a poster child for what Gottlieb is lamenting?  Pfizer recently sued Janssen over that very question, and the federal court is scheduled to decide a motion answering that question very shortly. 

Read More
3 Questions BlackBerry Investors Should Be Asking about the Facebook Patent Case

With BlackBerry's new mega-patent case against Facebook, Instagram, and WhatsApp, the company's long-awaited transformation into a serious patent assertion entity is undoubtedly complete. Even a simple perusal of BlackBerry's complaint reveals that the company has thrown significant resources at the case in the hopes of securing a windfall licensing fee from Facebook. At the same time, it is also clear that Facebook has rebuffed BlackBerry's pre-litigation attempts to license the patents. Considering that the case is likely much more material to BlackBerry investors than to Facebook holders, below are three critical questions that BlackBerry investors should be asking as they evaluate this new development.

Read More
Markman Advisors
Can Corcept Therapeutics fend off Teva's generic for Korlym®?

Corcept Therapeutics recently received a Paragraph IV notice letter from Teva for its drug, Korlym®.  The market’s reaction crushed the stock, sending it from approximately $23 to roughly $17 within a day.  Corcept Therapeutics has essentially one drug, Korlym® (mifepristone).  But whether Teva will enter with a generic version of Korlym® any time soon depends directly on the patents that Corcept has in its arsenal.  What are those patents?  Is the market’s reaction justified?  Or is this a buying opportunity? 

Read More
Cloudflare's win over Blackbird jeopardized by two recent CAFC cases.

Cloudflare recently prevailed on its motion to invalidate patents as ineligible in a case commenced by Blackbird Tech.  But Cloudflare’s win may be in jeopardy.  Two recent decisions from the Federal Circuit have held that winning on early Alice motions, like the one on which Cloudflare prevailed, will now be more difficult. 

Read More
The PTAB's Allergan / St. Regis Mohawk Decision: Explained

The PTAB has issued its much-anticipated decision on whether Allergan managed to pull off it’s scheme to avoid IPRs of its Restasis® patents by “selling” the patents to the St. Regis Mohawk Tribe.  On February 23, 2018, the PTAB denied the Tribe’s motion to terminate the IPRs on the ground based on its tribal sovereign immunity.  What were the PTAB’s reasons for denying the Tribe’s motion to terminate the IPRs?  And what are the ramifications for similar deals in the future?

Read More
Two recent Federal Circuit decisions could undermine early Alice motions.

Anyone who has followed Federal Circuit cases addressing Alice decisions has felt the whip-saw brain squeeze of trying to reconcile them all.  While some clear guidelines have emerged that have made assessing whether a given patent is susceptible to Alice, there remains a thick, gray cloud over how, exactly, the two-step framework applies in practice.  Two recent decisions from the Federal Circuit, Berkheimer v. HP and Aatrix Software v. Green Shades Software, may have established some more concrete guidance on handling early Alice motions in patent cases.

Read More
Sandoz lost two IPRs challenging Humira® patents - what does this mean for other biosimilars?

Sandoz was denied institution on two IPRs against Humira® patents owned by AbbVie.  As we previously discussed, in late 2017, Sandoz filed eight different IPRs against Humira® patents.  Two of those IPRs just failed to reach institution.  What are the take-aways, for Sandoz and any other Humira® biosimilars?

Read More
Kite and Juno Continue to Square Off in the Federal Circuit

Despite lingering concerns about the future profitability of Car-T based cancer treatments, there is no doubt that 2017 was a year of great change in the space. From the first FDA-approved product offering to the acquisition of two leading companies, Kite and Juno, by biotech behemoths Gilead and Celgene respectively, 2017 was truly Car-T's year in the sun. While investors in both Kite and Juno were rewarded for their belief in Car-T's commercial potential, it would be a mistake to ignore the ongoing patent dispute between these fierce competitors. 

Read More
Markman Advisors
What is Gilead's exposure from GSK's patent lawsuit against Biktarvy®, Gilead's new integrase inhibitor HIV therapy?

Gilead’s new HIV drug, Biktarvy®, has received FDA approval.  Almost immediately, Gilead was hit with a patent-infringement lawsuit by ViiV Healthcare, which is owned by GSK, along with Pfizer and Shionogi.  What is Gilead’s exposure?

Read More