The US Supreme Court passed up United Therapeutics Corporation’s request to review its failed bid to revive a patent for its blockbuster lung-disease drug Tyvaso, dealing a blow to its efforts to keep Liquidia Corporation’s competing treatment off US shelves.
The high court on Monday declined to review what UTC had called the “inconsistent and irreconcilable stances” of the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit regarding the USPTO’s reliance on arguments that weren’t presented in requests for patent validity reviews.
Liquidia shares jumped as much as 18% in New York trading Monday, while United Therapeutics shares were down around 1.3% as of 10:30 a.m.
Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson didn’t participate in the court’s consideration of UTC’s petition, according to the court’s announcement.
UTC sued Liquidia in Delaware federal court in June 2020 alleging the competitor infringed US Patent No. 10,716,793 with its pulmonary arterial hypertension drug Yutrepia.
Liquidia challenged the patent at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board, which invalidated it in July 2022. The tribunal’s decision was based on journal publications provided at professional conferences and not evidence entered into record. The Federal Circuit affirmed that decision in December.
“We are grateful that this specific chapter has come to a close and that the ’793 patent will now be forever unenforceable,” Roger Jeffs, Liquidia’s chief executive officer, said in a statement. “We will continue to fight for the earliest possible launch of Yutrepia so that patients and physicians have access to the unique benefits that Yutrepia can provide.”
UTC declined to comment.
UTC argued in its petition to the justices that the appeals court allowed its patent to be canceled based on theories not addressed during the PTAB’s inter partes review.
Some Federal Circuit panels review PTAB decisions de novo while others defer to the PTO’s discretion, UTC’s petition said, calling the PTO’s interpretation of the statute that created the IPR process unlawful.
“There is no such split,” Liquidia said in its Aug. 27 opposition brief. “UTC’s effort to create one misrepresents the cases it cites and conflates two entirely distinct issues.”
The parties are also continuing to fight in other venues. Click for full coverage.
