- Acumen Powered by Robins Kaplan LLP®
- American Indian Law and Policy
- Antitrust and Trade Regulation
- Appellate Advocacy and Guidance
- Business Litigation
- Civil Rights and Police Misconduct
- Class Action Litigation
- Corporate Governance and Special Situations
- Corporate Restructuring and Bankruptcy
- Domestic and International Arbitration
- Entertainment and Media Litigation
- Health Care Litigation
- Insurance and Catastrophic Loss
- Intellectual Property and Technology Litigation
- Mass Tort Attorneys
- Medical Malpractice Attorneys
- Personal Injury Attorneys
- Telecommunications Litigation and Arbitration
- Wealth Planning, Administration, and Fiduciary Disputes
Acumen Powered by Robins Kaplan LLP®
Ediscovery, Applied Science and Economics, and Litigation Support Solutions
-
June 17, 2024Emily Tremblay Named IP Rising Star by Euromoney in 2024 Women in Business Law Awards
-
June 17, 2024Three Robins Kaplan Partners Named BTI Client Service All-Stars
-
June 13, 2024Brendan Johnson Named South Dakota Trial Lawyer of The Year
-
June 27, 2024Sex Abuse Litigation
-
June 10-11, 20242024 Probate and Trust Law Section Conference
-
June 11, 2024FBA 2024 Federal Practice Seminar
-
June 2024Robins Kaplan Secures Landmark $7.75 Million Verdict in Aerosol Duster Misuse Case
-
June 2024To Seize or Not to Seize: Campus Protests and Police Uses of Force
-
June 2024Communicating Your Estate Plan: A Helpful Tool, Not a Fix-All
-
September 16, 2022Uber Company Systems Compromised by Widespread Cyber Hack
-
September 15, 2022US Averts Rail Workers Strike With Last-Minute Tentative Deal
-
September 14, 2022Hotter-Than-Expected August Inflation Prompts Massive Wall Street Selloff
Find additional firm contact information for press inquiries.
Find resources to help navigate legal and business complexities.
BTG Int’l Ltd. v. Amneal Pharms. LLC
The Federal Circuit affirmed the PTAB and district court’s finding of obviousness because the prior art showed, both together and individually, that abiraterone and prednisone were considered promising prostate cancer treatments.
May 14, 2019
![GENERICally Speaking: A Hatch Waxman Litigation Bulletin](/-/media/images/newsletters/generically-speaking-social-graphics/generically-speaking-nwsltr-badge.jpg?la=en&h=160&w=390&la=en&hash=314B8432ED62E0647D7FC4565EC18B79)
Case Name: BTG Int’l Ltd. v. Amneal Pharms. LLC, 923 F.3d 1063, 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 14241 (Fed. Cir. May 14, 2019) (Circuit Judges Moore, Wallach, and Chen presiding; Opinion by Wallach) (Appeal from D.N.J., McNulty, J.; Appeal from USPTO)
Drug Product and Patent(s)-in-Suit: Zytiga® (abiraterone acetate/prednisone); U.S. Pat. No. 8,822,438 (“the ’438 patent”)
Nature of Case and Issue(s) Presented: The ’438 patent recites a method for the treatment of prostate cancer comprising the administration of abiraterone and prednisone. Prior to trial, the PTAB found the ’438 patent invalid as obvious. After trial, the district court similarly concluded that the ’438 patent was invalid as obvious. BTG’s appeals of the PTAB and district court decisions were consolidated for purposes of appeal. The Federal Circuit adopted the PTAB’s claim construction and affirmed its obviousness decision.
Why Defendant Prevailed: BTG argued that the PTAB erred in its construction of “treatment.” In particular, BTG argued that “treatment” required an anti-cancer effect and should not be construed, as the PTAB found, to also include palliative effects and the reduction of side effects. The Federal Circuit explained, however, that the specification states that a “therapeutic agent” may be either “an anti-cancer agent or a steroid.” Further, because the specification explained that prednisone is an anti-cancer agent and a steroid, the Federal Circuit concluded that “treating” with prednisone must logically include more than just anti-cancer effects and should include the long-familiar steroid effects of palliation and the reduction of side effects.
Next, BTG did not contest that the prior art taught each limitation of the asserted claims or that a POSA would have been motivated to combine abiraterone and prednisone. Instead, BTG argued that a POSA would not have had a reasonable expectation of success. But BTG made no reasonable-expectation-of-success argument under the adopted claim construction. Further, even under BTG’s proposed construction, the Federal Circuit explained that the record demonstrated that a POSA would have had a reasonable expectation of success in combining abiraterone and prednisone, as they were both together and individually considered promising prostate-cancer treatments.
The Federal Circuit also rejected BTG’s purported secondary considerations relating to unexpected results, skepticism, failure of other, long-felt need, and commercial success. The use of abiraterone and prednisone to treat prostate cancer was well known and did not provide unexpectedly superior results. Further, given that other treatments for prostate cancer were available, the evidence did not establish that there was a specific unsolved, long-felt need. Moreover, BTG’s alleged lack of enthusiasm by a few was not equivalent to skepticism or failure of others such that the combination would not have been obvious. Finally, the existence of a blocking patent mitigated against a finding of commercial success.
Related Professionals
Christopher A. Pinahs
Partner
Related Publications
Related News
If you are interested in having us represent you, you should call us so we can determine whether the matter is one for which we are willing or able to accept professional responsibility. We will not make this determination by e-mail communication. The telephone numbers and addresses for our offices are listed on this page. We reserve the right to decline any representation. We may be required to decline representation if it would create a conflict of interest with our other clients.
By accepting these terms, you are confirming that you have read and understood this important notice.