On October 1, 2010, Bayer's declaratory judgment action and Biogen's patent infringement suit were consolidated under Civil Action No. The day before Biogen filed its lawsuit, on May 27, 2010, Bayer sued Biogen seeking a declaration that Bayer does not infringe the '755 patent claims and that the '755 patent claims are invalid. Thus, only Biogen's claims against Serono and Pfizer (and Serono and Pfizer's defenses thereto) were tried before the jury and are the subject of the instant motions.īiogen's infringement claims against Bayer and Novartis are based on the sale of products Betaseron ® and Extavia ® in the United States for the treatment of MS. Prior to trial, Biogen's infringement claims against Serono and Pfizer were severed from Biogen's infringement claims against Bayer and Novartis. ("Bayer"), and Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corp. On May 28, 2010, Biogen filed this patent infringement suit asserting claims of the '755 patent against Defendants, Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals Inc. Biogen's remaining JMOL motions and each of Defendants' JMOL motions are hereby DENIED.
Jmol civil procedure trial#
The Court also conditionally orders a new trial on anticipation and induced infringement against Serono and Pfizer pursuant to Rule 50(c), and orders a new trial on all damages issues pursuant to Rule 59. Having considered the parties' written submissions and oral presentations, and for the reasons discussed below, Biogen's JMOL motions with respect to anticipation, induced infringement against Serono and Pfizer, and certain non-litigated defenses are hereby GRANTED.
The parties also submitted letters following oral argument. The Court heard oral argument on June 6, 2018. Defendants move for JMOL on the issues of patent eligibility, obviousness, enablement, written description, contributory infringement by Pfizer, and lost profits damages. Biogen also moves conditionally and in the alternative for a new trial as to certain issues pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 50(c) and 59, respectively. Specifically, Biogen moves for JMOL on the issues of anticipation, induced infringement by Serono and Pfizer, certain defenses that were not litigated at trial, and certain subsidiary damages-related issues. Now pending before the Court are renewed motions for judgment as a matter of law ("JMOL") pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 50(b) by Plaintiff Biogen MA Inc. ("Pfizer") (collectively, "Defendants") have contributed to the infringement of claims 1 and 2 by selling or offering to sell Rebit ®, that neither Serono nor Pfizer has actively induced the infringement of claims 1 or 2, that claims 1, 2, and 3 of the '755 patent are not invalid for obviousness, lack of adequate written description, or lack of enablement, and that claims 1, 2, and 3 are invalid for anticipation.
7,588,755 (the "'755 patent") when they administer or self-administer the product Rebit ® for the treatment of multiple sclerosis ("MS"), that Defendants EMD Serono, Inc. On February 23, 2018, the jury returned a verdict finding that healthcare professionals and/or patients directly infringe claims 1 and 2 of United States Patent No. The Court held a five-week jury trial in this patent infringement action beginning on January 18, 2018.
0 kommentar(er)
