Axinn Secures IPR Victory for Par in Challenge to Horizon’s Ravicti Patent
September 29, 2016
On behalf of Par Pharmaceutical, Inc., attorneys from Axinn successfully challenged U.S. Patent No. 8,404,215 via an inter partes review (IPR) before the Patent Trials and Appeals Board (PTAB) at the United States Patent and Trademark Office. The ’215 patent is listed in FDA’s Orange Book for Ravicti (glycerol phenylbutyrate), a brand name drug used to treat urea cycle disorders. On July 26, 2016, the PTAB heard oral argument on the validity of the ’215 patent, and on September 29, 2016 the PTAB issued a Final Decision finding all claims unpatentable.
The company that markets Ravicti and owns the ’215 patent, Horizon Therapeutics, Inc., had previously asserted the ’215 patent against Par in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas. In a separate action in the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey, Horizon has also asserted against Par three closely-related patents in the same family as the unpatentable ’215 patent, which claim nearly identical subject matter.
The Axinn team representing Par in the ’215 patent IPR consisted of Aziz Burgy and Matthew Murphy.
To subscribe to our publications, click here.
Featured Insights
Featured Insights
American Bar Association 2025 Asia-Pacific Conference
Speaking Engagement
Antitrust
NBA Commercial Law Section 38th Annual Corporate Counsel Conference
Sponsorship
Antitrust
GCR Live: Law Leaders Global 2025
Speaking Engagement
Antitrust
The 32nd Annual Marketing Partner Forum
Event
SABA North America Corporate Counsel Retreat 2025
Sponsorship
Antitrust
Axinn Antitrust Insight: FTC Announces Revised HSR Thresholds for 2025
Client Alerts
Antitrust
Four Axinn Thought Leadership Pieces Nominated for the Antitrust Writing Awards
Awards & Recognitions
Antitrust
Merger Remedies Back in Vogue Under Trump
Media Mentions
Antitrust
Three Takeaways from the Initial Determination at the ITC Regarding Standard Essential Patents in the 1380 Investigation
Axinn Viewpoints
Intellectual Property
A POSA’s Motivation Is Not Required To Be the Same as the Inventor’s in Evaluating Obviousness
Axinn Viewpoints
Intellectual Property