Court ditches $1.8B verdict against Abbott

The U.S. Court of Appeals in Washington, D.C., has decided that Abbott Laboratories doesn't have to pay $1.8 billion for violating a Johnson & Johnson patent when it developed its big-selling rheumatoid arthritis drug Humira.

It was a record-breaking patent-infringement judgment, awarded by a jury in a Marshall, Texas, court and widely seen as friendly to patent-infringement plaintiffs. That jury determined Abbott had followed J&J's patented antibody process to develop Humira. But as the Wall Street Journal reports, the appeals court disagreed, saying that the two companies had used different development strategies--and produced different antibodies as a result.

What's more, the court ruled that J&J's patent claims were invalid, so they couldn't be infringed anyway. Abbott was "pleased" with the verdict, of course. A spokeswoman told Reuters, "The evidence clearly showed that Abbott was first to invent a fully human anti-TNF antibody, Humira."

Understandably, J&J wasn't happy. "We are disappointed by the decision," Rob Bazemore, president of the company's Centocor unit, said in a statement. "We are considering whether to ask for reconsideration by the panel or by the court of appeals as a whole."

- see the J&J statement
- get the WSJ story
- read the article from Reuters

Suggested Articles

BMS’s Opdivo has plenty of competition in its current bladder cancer indication—so it’s hoping to strike out on its own in a new area of the disease.

The Japanese approval, under the brand name Jyseleca, came a month after an FDA complete response letter that asked Gilead for more data.

The Trump Administration has opened the doors for Florida and other states to import prescription drugs from Canada—despite industry objections.