Celgene reiterates stance on Kyle Bass IPRs
Biopharmaceutical company Celgene has reiterated its stance on the inter partes review (IPR) petitions filed by hedge fund manager Kyle Bass and has hinted it will appeal against a recent unfavourable decision.
In a statement to LSIPR, the US-based company said it was disappointed by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board’s (PTAB) decision to not sanction Bass and his organisation the Coalition for Affordable Drugs.
Yesterday, LSIPR reported that Celgene’s request for the PTAB to dismiss two IPRs that the coalition had filed against the company had been rejected.
Bass had argued that two patents should be declared invalid. The patents—US numbers 6,315,720 and 6,045,501—were targeted in April and May this year respectively.
The ‘720 patent covers a method for helping a patient avoid the adverse side effects of drugs used to treat teratogens. The ‘501 patent is called “Methods for delivering a drug to a patient while preventing the exposure of a foetus or other contraindicated individual to the drug”.
But the PTAB refused to sanction Bass on several grounds that had been raised by Celgene.
It rejected claims raised by Celgene that Bass and the coalition, which has filed several IPR petitions against other life sciences companies, lacked any “legitimate competitive interest” in the validity of the patents and that these types of IPRs were contrary to the purpose of the America Invents Act (AIA), which it said was set up to reduce abusive litigation tactics.
In response, the PTAB said that IPR petitioners are not limited to competitors and added that the purpose of the AIA was not just to provide a less costly alternative to litigation but also to establish a more efficient and streamlined patent system.
A Celgene spokesperson said: “We believe that the use of the IPR process for the purpose of affecting stock prices is an abuse of process that goes well beyond the intent of Congress in creating the IPR process.
“We are confident in the strength of our intellectual property and believe that our patents will be upheld on the merits. We intend to continue to vigorously defend our patents.”
