small-logo
ProfessionalsCapabilitiesInsights & NewsCareersLocations
About UsAlumniOpportunity & InclusionPro BonoCorporate Social Responsibility
Stay Connected:
facebookinstagramlinkedintwitteryoutube
  1. Insights & News

Client Alert

Generic Pharmaceutical Company, Which Had Filed an ANDA With a Paragraph III Certification, Had Standing to Pursue Inter Partes Review to Invalidate the Patent

  • PDFPDF
    • Email
    • LinkedIn
    • Facebook
    • Twitter
    Share this page
  • PDFPDF
    • Email
    • LinkedIn
    • Facebook
    • Twitter
    Share this page

Client Alert

Generic Pharmaceutical Company, Which Had Filed an ANDA With a Paragraph III Certification, Had Standing to Pursue Inter Partes Review to Invalidate the Patent

  • PDFPDF
    • Email
    • LinkedIn
    • Facebook
    • Twitter
    Share this page

1 Min Read

Author

Ivan Poullaos

Related Locations

Charlotte
Chicago
Los Angeles
Silicon Valley

Related Topics

Inter Partes Review (IPR)
Patent Litigation
ANDA

Related Capabilities

Intellectual Property
Patent Litigation
Medical Devices

Related Regions

North America

January 14, 2019

Amerigen Pharmaceuticals Ltd. v. UCB Pharma GMBH, No. 2017-2596 (Fed. Cir. Jan. 11, 2019)

A generic pharmaceutical company filed an Abbreviated New Drug Application (ANDA) to make a generic version of a brand drug. The patent-at-issue was listed in the Orange Book, and a generic pharmaceutical company made a paragraph III certification indicating that it would not enter the market until after the patent expired. The generic pharmaceutical company filed an inter partes review (IPR) seeking to invalidate the patent. On appeal, the patentee argued that the generic pharmaceutical company did not have standing because by filing a paragraph III certification, the generic pharmaceutical company had agreed not to enter the market until after the patent expired. The Federal Circuit found standing.

A party seeking judicial review has the burden of proving standing. To establish standing, a party must show an injury in fact traceable to the challenged conduct, which can be redressed by a favorable judicial decision. In this case, even though a paragraph III certification was filed, the listing of the patent in the Orange Book delays the launch of the generic pharmaceutical company’s product. If the generic pharmaceutical company succeeds in the IPR and invalidates the patent, the patent would have to be removed from the Orange Book, and the generic pharmaceutical company’s product could be approved. Thus, a favorable IPR would have made it possible for the generic pharmaceutical company’s product to enter the market.

A copy of the opinion can be found here 

Related Professionals

Related Professionals

David Enzminger

Ivan Poullaos

Mike Rueckheim

Danielle Williams

David Enzminger

Ivan Poullaos

Mike Rueckheim

Danielle Williams

Logo
facebookinstagramlinkedintwitteryoutube

Copyright © 2025. Winston & Strawn LLP

AlumniCorporate Transparency Act Task ForceDEI Compliance Task ForceEqual Rights AmendmentLaw GlossaryThe Oval UpdateWinston MinutePrivacy PolicyCookie PolicyFraud & Scam AlertsNoticesSubscribeAttorney Advertising

We, our service providers, and other third parties use cookies and other analytics, advertising, and tracking technologies on this site. Your information, including personal information and interactions with this site, may be monitored, recorded, or collected through these tools and further used or disclosed by us, our service providers, and authorized third parties. For more details, please visit our privacy policy.