IP Case Law › Patents › E.R. Squibb and Sons, LLC & Ors. v. Zydus Lifesciences Limit…
Relevant Acts and provisions
Patents Act, 1970
Section 107Section 107ASection 108Section 48Section 64
Provisions considered: Sections 48, 64, 107, 107A and 108 of the Patents Act, 1970, in a quia timet action concerning a biosimilar.
Brief facts
E.R. Squibb and Sons and its group companies, patentees of an Indian patent for monoclonal antibodies used in a cancer immunotherapy drug, filed a quia timet suit against Zydus Lifesciences to restrain manufacture and sale of a biosimilar. The plaintiffs alleged that the defendant had already commenced manufacturing and stockpiling batches of the biosimilar before the patent's expiry, and sought an interim injunction against imminent infringement.
Issues before the Court
- Did the plaintiffs make out a strong prima facie case of imminent infringement to justify quia timet relief under Section 48?
- Can biosimilar product manufactured or stockpiled during the term of the patent continue to be restrained even though the patent is due to expire shortly?
Court's findings
The Court held that a quia timet action is maintainable where a party demonstrates a reasonable apprehension of imminent, substantial infringement, and that the plaintiffs had established a strong prima facie case given the defendant's own conduct, including seeking manufacturing approvals for a biosimilar covered by the subsisting suit patent.
The Court further held, in the absence of Indian precedent directly on the point and agreeing with the reasoning of foreign authority, that a product infringing a patent during its term remains tainted by that infringement and can continue to be restrained under Section 48 even after the patent's expiry, insofar as it concerns stock manufactured while the patent subsisted.
The Court accordingly granted an interim injunction restraining dealings in such stock and directed disclosure of the quantities manufactured.
Decision
Interim injunction granted restraining the defendant from manufacturing or selling biosimilar stock made during the patent's subsistence, with disclosure of quantities directed.
Key legal principle / ratio
In a quia timet action under Sections 48 and 108, a strong prima facie apprehension of imminent infringement, evidenced by the defendant's own regulatory and manufacturing conduct, can justify an interim injunction; and a biosimilar or other product that infringed a valid patent during its term remains restrainable in respect of that infringing stock even after the patent expires.
Keywords
Biotechnology Interim Injunction Patent Infringement Pharmaceutical Patent Pre-grant Opposition
Read the judgment
More Patents judgments
Array Biopharma Inc v. Deputy Controller of Patents and Designs
A combination of distinct and independent active drugs, each with its own chemical identity and mechanism, does not fall under the Section 3(d) bar for derivatives of known substances. Using phrases such as 'for simultaneous, sepa…
Inventive StepMethod of TreatmentPharmaceutical CombinationPrior ArtPatentsBayer Corporation v. Union of India & Ors.
A compulsory licence under Section 84 of the Patents Act, 1970 may be granted where the reasonable requirements of the public with respect to a patented invention have not been satisfied, the invention is not available at a reason…
Compulsory LicencePublic HealthReasonably Affordable PriceSection 84PatentsBigtec Private Limited v. Assistant Controller of Patents and Designs
An objection that devising nucleotide probes or primers is routine experimentation lacking inventive step under Section 2(1)(ja) must engage with evidence of unexpected effects placed on record; and the Section 3(c) exclusion for …
BiotechnologyInventive StepPatent ProsecutionPrior Art