Emcure prevails against ‘fairytale’ accusations

Emcure fends off COVID-19 trade secrets suit in Washington | A US biotech had inked a short-lived deal with Indian generic pharma company’s subsidiary.

Emcure Pharmaceuticals has persuaded a US federal court to dismiss a lawsuit accusing it of stealing trade secrets to create a COVID-19 vaccine.

Judge James Robart delivered a sealed order at the US District Court for the Western District of Washington, granting Emcure's motion to dismiss biopharma company HDT Bio’s complaints without prejudice.

The case emerged in March 2022, when the Seattle-based biotech sued the Indian drugmaker alleging the “blatant theft” of a game-changing COVID-19 vaccine technology.

HDT claimed that it was owed $950 million in compensatory damages for the misappropriation of trade secrets and sought a jury trial on the issue.

Licensing agreement

The biotech accused Emcure of spinning “a Cinderella-style fairytale…to lure investors to a generics maker whose prior attempt to go public failed for lack of interest”.

According to HDT, its vaccine, HDT-301, uses mRNA to teach the immune system how to fight the virus, dramatically improving upon existing vaccines.

HDT had alleged that Sanjay Singh, director and CEO of Emcure’s subsidiary, Gennova, visited its headquarters in Seattle in January 2020, where he met with HDT CEO Steven Reed.

HDT and Emcure’s subsidiary, Gennova, then entered into various contracts, culminating in a licensing agreement giving Gennova the right to use HDT’s technology to develop and sell a COVID-19 vaccine in India.

HDT claimed that by late 2021, Emcure was proclaiming HDT-301 and the technology behind it as its own, and Emcure and/or Gennova then sought two Indian patents on the disputed technology.

Emcure counterclaimed by arguing that almost the entirety of the complaint focuses on the relationship between HDT and Gennova.

Emcure not party to deals

The generic drugmaker noted that Singh visited Seattle in January 2020 to discuss the potential partnership with Reed on Gennova’s behalf, but insisted that Emcure had not been part of these agreements.

“The terms were simple: HDT would provide the technology while Gennova would manufacture the product in India and shepherd it through India’s regulatory approval process,” said Emcure.

The Indian drugmaker then explained that Gennova and HDT reached an impasse regarding their collaboration in autumn 2021, which ultimately culminated in Gennova terminating the licensing agreement in late November 2021.

“The complaint’s bloated billion-dollar damages demand shows this case for what it is: a made-for-headlines hit piece,” added Emcure. "Moreover, the complaint’s allegations arise from agreements between HDT and Gennova."

HDT, it continued, has already sued Gennova in the London Court of International Arbitration.

Emcure argued before the district court that there were “three independent reasons” why the case should be dismissed, including the court’s lack of personal jurisdiction over Emcure; the fact that the doctrine of forum non coveniens favours dismissal because India is an adequate, alternative forum for this dispute; and finally because HDT failed to identify its alleged trade secrets “with particularity”.

“Each is a separate, independent, and legally sufficient ground to support the dismissal of this case in its entirety,” said Emcure.

Did you enjoy reading this story?  Sign up to our free daily newsletters and get stories sent like this straight to your inbox.