Astellas Pharma Inc. v. Sandoz Inc.

Myrbetriq® (mirabegron)

June 9, 2023

GENERICally Speaking

Case Name: Astellas Pharma Inc. v. Sandoz Inc., Civ. No. 20-1589, 2023 WL 3934386 (D. Del. June 9, 2023) (Bataillon, J.) 

Drug Product and Patent(s)-in-Suit: Myrbetriq® (mirabegron); U.S. Patent No. 10,842,780 (“the ’780 patent”)

Nature of the Case and Issue(s) Presented: Astellas sued to enjoin a number of Defendants from marketing generic versions of Myrbetriq, an extended-release formulation of mirabegron for the treatment of overactive bladder. The ’780 patent claims overcoming “food effect,” described as a drug’s dangerous potency on an empty stomach contrasted by its inefficacy on a full one, by describing an extended-release formulation of mirabegron comprising a hydrogel-forming polymer, hydrophilic additive, and a dissolution limitation: that the dosage has dissolved no more than 39% at 1.5 hours and at least 75% after 7 hours. The parties engaged in a five-day bench trial. The court found that the asserted claims were invalid.

Why Defendants Prevailed: Defendants argued that the ’780 patent was invalid for not meeting the enablement requirement of 35 U.S.C. § 112. Specifically, Defendants argued that the patent specification did not offer sufficient clarity to enable a skilled artisan to make the invention without undue experimentation. Astellas countered that the specification directs routine activity by highly-skilled artisans in a predictable art. Taking Astellas at its word, the court found that Astellas conceded that the ’780 patent was enabled because it claimed invalid subject matter: a natural law applied via routine, conventional, and well-known methods. Relying extensively on Astellas’s expert conceding at trial that sustained release hydrogel formulations were well-known, well-characterized, not difficult to formulate, and not difficult to tune to arrive at a suitable dissolution profile, the court found that “Astellas’s zealous defense has conceded more fundamental ground. Embodying no more than the discovery of a natural law applied via well-known techniques for formulating sustained release tablets, the ’780 patent claims ineligible subject matter.”

Related Publications

First Quarter
GENERICally Speaking: A Hatch-Waxman Litigation Bulletin
Oren Langer, Christopher Pinahs, Emily Tremblay, and Christine May
March 25, 2024
Endo Ventures Unlimited Co. v. Nexus Pharms. Inc.
GENERICally Speaking Hatch Waxman Bulletin
March 22, 2024
Mallinckrodt plc v. Airgas Therapeutics LLC
GENERICally Speaking Hatch Waxman Bulletin
March 8, 2024
UCB, Inc. v. Mylan Techs. Inc.
GENERICally Speaking Hatch Waxman Bulletin
March 5, 2024
Genentech, Inc. v. Sandoz, Inc.
GENERICally Speaking Hatch Waxman Bulletin
Back to Top