Item 3. Legal Proceedings
ITEM 3.
LEGAL PROCEEDINGS
Legal Malpractice Suit
On September 17, 2020, the Company filed a lawsuit against Hedrick Gardner Kincheloe & Garofalo, L.L.P. and David L. Levy, the attorneys who previously represented the Company in Eshelman v. Puma Biotechnology, Inc., et al . in the Superior Court of Mecklenburg County, North Carolina. The Company is alleging legal malpractice based on the defendants’ negligent handling of the defense of the Company in Eshelman v. Puma Biotechnology, Inc., et al . The Company is seeking recovery of the entire amount awarded in Eshelman v. Puma Biotechnology, Inc., et al . and all legal fees and expenses incurred in appealing from the judgment and retrying the damages phase of the trial. On November 23, 2020, the defendant filed an answer to the complaint denying the allegations of negligence. On August 19, 2022, the Company filed a voluntary dismissal of the legal malpractice action, without prejudice, to allow the Eshelman v. Puma Biotechnology, Inc., et al . to conclude before proceedings. On June 2, 2023, the Company re-filed the lawsuit against Hedrick Gardner Kincheloe & Garofalo, L.L.P. and David L. Levy, the attorneys who previously represented the Company in Eshelman v. Puma Biotechnology, Inc., et al. in the Superior Court of Mecklenburg County, North Carolina. On August 22, 2023, the defendants filed motions to dismiss the case. These motions were presented at a hearing on February 20, 2024. The Superior Court Judge granted the motions to dismiss on March 20, 2024. The Company appealed this ruling to the North Carolina Court of Appeals.
Patent-Related Proceedings
AstraZeneca Litigation
On September 22, 2021, the Company filed suit against AstraZeneca Pharmaceuticals, LP, AstraZeneca AB, and AstraZeneca PLC for infringement of United States Patent Nos. 10,603,314 (“the ‘314 patent”) and 10,596,162 (“the ‘162 patent”) ( Puma Biotechnology, Inc. et al. v. AstraZeneca Pharmaceuticals LP et al ., 1:21CV01338 (D. Del. Sep. 22, 2021)). The Company’s complaint alleges that AstraZeneca’s commercial manufacture, use, offer for sale, sale, distribution, and/or importation of Tagrisso® (osimertinib) products for the treatment of gefitinib and/or erlotinib-resistant non-small cell lung cancer infringes the ‘314 and ‘162 patents. The Company is an exclusive licensee of the ‘314 and ‘162 patents under the Pfizer Agreement. Wyeth is a co-plaintiff. Plaintiffs seek a judgment that AstraZeneca’s product infringes the asserted patents and an award of monetary damages in an amount to be proven at trial. AstraZeneca AB and AstraZeneca Pharmaceuticals LP filed an answer and counterclaims on November 5, 2021, including claims challenging the asserted patents as not infringed and/or invalid, and accusing plaintiffs of unclean hands and patent misuse. The parties stipulated to dismiss AstraZeneca PLC as a defendant and Pfizer as a Counterclaim Defendant on December 10, 2021, which the Court so ordered on December 13, 2021. The Company filed its answer to AstraZeneca’s counterclaims on December 17, 2021, denying those claims. The case was reassigned to visiting Judge Matthew Kennelly of the Northern District of Illinois. A Markman Hearing was conducted on March 17, 2023, and the Court issued its claim construction decision on March 29, 2023. Fact discovery closed on May 19, 2023, and expert discovery closed on November 17, 2023. The Court denied the parties’ respective motions for summary judgment and Daubert motions, other than to clarify that Plaintiffs’ damages cannot extend to any time period before the asserted patents were issued. The Court granted AstraZeneca’s motion to dismiss the Company as a Plaintiff on constitutional standing grounds but denied the motion to dismiss Wyeth as a Plaintiff on constitutional standing grounds. On April 29, 2024, the Court granted AstraZeneca’s motion to dismiss AstraZeneca’s counterclaims against the Company, which removed the Company from the case. Wyeth remained in the case as a Plaintiff and counterclaim-defendant. Under the Company’s worldwide exclusive license agreement with Pfizer, Inc. (the parent of Wyeth) as amended, the Company also maintains contractual rights to recover monetary damages in the AstraZeneca litigation, and those contractual rights are unaffected by the court’s March 18, 2024 and April 29, 2024 orders. A jury trial was held May 13-17, 2024. The jury found in favor of Wyeth and against AstraZeneca. In particular, the jury found that use of Tagrisso® according to each of the three FDA-approved indications infringes the asserted claims of the ‘314 and ‘162 patents, and that AstraZeneca induces that infringement. The jury further rejected AstraZeneca’s challenges to the validity of the patents, finding that they are not invalid. The jury awarded damages to Wyeth for past acts of infringement through December 31, 2023, in the amount of $107,500,000. A separate bench trial related to certain equitable claims and defenses raised by AstraZeneca was held before Judge Kennelly on June 20 and 25, 2024. On August 6, 2024, Judge Kennelly issued his ruling on the issues that were tried in the bench trial, finding for Wyeth and against AstraZeneca on all claims and defenses. The Court found that AstraZeneca had not proved its claim that Wyeth’s asserted patents were invalid as indefinite, or that Wyeth had committed acts that would give rise to findings of unclean hands, implied waiver, or patent misuse. AstraZeneca has filed a motion challenging the jury’s verdict and requesting a new trial. Wyeth has filed a motion requesting supplemental damages for past infringement from January 1, 2024, through the date of judgment; pre-and-post judgment interest, and ongoing royalties through the remaining term of the patents. Briefing on these motions from both sides was completed on July 16, 2024. On August 14, 2024, Judge Kennelly ruled on AstraZeneca’s motion challenging the jury’s verdict, granting it in part and denying it in part. The Court granted AstraZeneca’s motion for judgment as a matter of law that the '314 and '162 patents are invalid under 35 U.S.C. § 112 for lacking enablement and adequate written description as to a particular claim limitation. In all other respects, the Court denied AstraZeneca’s motion. The Court entered its final and appealable judgment accordingly. The Company respectfully disagrees with the Court’s ruling regarding invalidity with respect to the particular claim limitation. Wyeth filed a notice of appeal on September 12, 2024, appealing the District Court’s judgment as a matter of law, as well as other rulings and opinions of the Court adverse to Wyeth. Wyeth filed its opening brief on appeal to the Federal Circuit on December 18, 2024.
58
Table of Contents
Acebright China Litigation
On January 18, 2022, Shanghai Acebright Pharmaceuticals Group Co., Ltd. (“Acebright”) filed an abbreviated new drug application (“ANDA”) with the National Medical Products Administration in China (“NMPA”) seeking approval to market a generic version of the Company’s NERLYNX® (neratinib) tablet, 40mg in China. Acebright seeks approval prior to the expiration of three patents listed on the China Patent Information Registration Platform for Marketed Drugs (“Chinese Orange Book”), namely, Chinese Patent Nos. ZL201410082103.7, ZL201080060546.6, and ZL200880118789.3 (the “’789 patent” and collectively, the “NERLYNX® Patents”), alleging in a Type 4.2 patent declaration that its generic version of NERLYNX does not fall within the scope of the claims of NERLYNX® Patents listed in the Chinese Orange Book. The patent declaration of Acebright was published in the Chinese Orange Book on January 19, 2022. On March 2, 2022, the Company filed petitions with the China National Intellectual Property Administration (“CNIPA”) and requested administrative determination that Acebright’s generic neratinib tablet falls within the scope of the claims of NERLYNX® Patents listed in the Chinese Orange Book. The Company’s request for administrative determination was accepted by CNIPA on March 18, 2022. The Company has notified NMPA of the acceptance of the request for administrative determination for NMPA to institute a stay of Acebright’s ANDA for nine months. On July 11, 2022, CNIPA decided that claims 5 and 6 of Patent No. ZL200880118789.3 are not eligible for registration in the Chinese Orange Book on the ground that these two pharmaceutical method-of-use claims fall within the scope of “patents of crystalline forms,” which are not eligible for listing in the Chinese Orange Book. On September 9, 2022, CNIPA decided that the generic drug in Acebright’s ANDA does not fall within the protection scope of claims 1, 3, 5 and 6 of Patent No. ZL201410082103.7 and claims 1-4, 7 and 9-13 of Patent No. ZL201080060546.6. The three CNIPA administrative decisions on NERLYNX® Patents have lifted the stay of Acebright’s ANDA by NMPA. The Company has appealed each CNIPA administrative decision in January 2023 at the Beijing Intellectual Property Court (“BJIPC”). The three appeals were accepted by BJIPC on February 20, 2023. The Company also filed three civil complaints based on the three NERLYNX® Patents against Acebright with the BJIPC in July 2022 and requested court determination that Acebright’s generic neratinib tablet falls within the scope of the claims of NERLYNX® Patents. On May 6, 2023, the Company withdrew two civil lawsuits and two appeals in relation to Chinese Patent Nos. ZL201410082103.7 and ZL201080060546.6 at the BJIPC. On May 24, 2023, the BJIPC accepted the Company’s withdrawal request. On July 24, 2023, the Company withdrew the one remaining civil lawsuit and one appeal in relation to Chinese Patent No. ZL200880118789.3 at the BJIPC. On August 15, 2023, the BJIPC accepted the Company’s withdrawal request. On September 12, 2023, the NMPA approved Acebright’s ANDA to market a generic version of the Company’s NERLYNX® in China with the approval number of GuoYaoZhunZi H20234141.
On December 28, 2023, the Company filed a civil lawsuit against Acebright for infringement of the ’789 patent under Article 11 of the Chinese Patent Law before Jiangsu Nanjing Intermediate People’s Court. The Company’s complaint alleges that Acebright’s offer for sale of a generic version of the Company’s NERLYNX® product infringes the ’789 patent. The Company seeks a judgment that Acebright’s product infringes the ’789 patent and Acebright’s act of offer for sale shall be enjoined. On January 2, 2024, Jiangsu Nanjing Intermediate People’s Court accepted the civil complaint. An oral hearing was held on June 19, 2024, during which the Company amended its complaint to allege that Acebright making, selling and offering to sell the generic version of NERLYNX® infringes the ’789 patent. On July 24, 2024, the Company submitted a request to withdraw the lawsuit. On August 8, 2024, Jiangsu Nanjing Intermediate People’s Court accepted the withdrawal request.
On September 27, 2024, the Company filed an additional patent infringement claim against Acebright at Jiangsu Nanjing Intermediate People’s Court. On October 14, 2024, the Court accepted the complaint and designated case number (2024) Su 01 Min Chu 2192 to this case. On December 16, 2024, the Court conducted an evidence exchange hearing. On January 10, 2025, the Court conducted a hearing of party experts on the evaluation of evidence.
Aosaikang China Litigation
On November 17, 2022, Jiangsu Aosaikang Pharmaceutical Co. Ltd. (“Aosaikang”) filed an ANDA with NMPA in China seeking approval to market a generic version of the Company’s NERLYNX®. The ANDA application No. is CYHS2202006. Aosaikang made Type 4.2 declarations against the four Orange Book Patents ZL201410082103.7, ZL201080060546.6, ZL200880118789.3 and ZL201710057547.9, alleging that its generic version of NERLYNX does not fall within the scope of the claims of the Orange Book patents. Aosaikang also alleged that Patents ZL200880118789.3 and ZL201710057547.9 are not eligible for Chinese Orange Book listing.
On December 28, 2022, the Company submitted four Article 76 petitions against the Aosaikang ANDA with the CNIPA and requested administrative determination that Aosaikang’s generic neratinib tablet falls within the scope of the claims of the four Orange Book patents. On January 6, 2023, the CNIPA accepted the Company’s request for administrative determination in relation to Patent Nos. ZL201410082103.7 and ZL201080060546.6. Also on January 6, 2023, the CNIPA declined to accept the Company’s request for administrative determination in relation to Patent Nos. ZL200880118789.3 and ZL201710057547.9, alleging that the listed claims are not eligible for registration in the Chinese Orange Book on the ground that these pharmaceutical method-of-use claims fall within the scope of “patents of crystalline forms,” which are not eligible for listing in the Chinese Orange Book. On January 28, 2023, the Company requested the NMPA to institute a nine-month stay against Aosaikang ANDA starting from the CNIPA’s acceptance of the Company’s request for administrative determination. On June 2, 2023, CNIPA decided that the generic drug in Aosaikang’s ANDA does not fall within the protection scope of claims 1, 3, 5 and 6 of Patent No. ZL201410082103.7 and claims 1-4, 7 and 9-13 of Patent No. ZL201080060546.6. The two CNIPA administrative decisions on NERLYNX® Patents have lifted the stay of Aosaikang’s ANDA by NMPA. On October 22, 2024, the NMPA approved Aosaikang’s ANDA to market a generic version of the Company’s NERLYNX® in China with the approval number of GuoYaoZhunZi H20249180.
59
Table of Contents
Convalife China Litigation
Convalife Pharmaceuticals (Shanghai) Co., Ltd (“Convalife”) filed an ANDA with NMPA in China seeking approval to market a generic version of the Company’s NERLYNX®. The ANDA application No. is CYHS2202095. On December 23, 2022, Convalife made Type 4.2 declarations against the four Orange Book Patents ZL201410082103.7, ZL201080060546.6, ZL200880118789.3 and ZL201710057547.9, alleging that its generic version of NERLYNX does not fall within the scope of the claims of the Orange Book patents. Convalife also alleged that Patents ZL200880118789.3 and ZL201710057547.9 are not eligible for Chinese Orange Book listing.
On February 1, 2023, the Company submitted four Article 76 petitions against the Convalife ANDA with the CNIPA and requested administrative determination that Convalife’s generic neratinib tablet falls within the scope of the claims of the four Orange Book patents. On February 3, 2023, the CNIPA accepted the Company’s request for administrative determination in relation to Patent Nos. ZL201410082103.7 and ZL201080060546.6. Also on February 3, 2023, the CNIPA declined to accept the Company’s request for administrative determination in relation to Patent Nos. ZL200880118789.3 and ZL201710057547.9, alleging that the listed claims are not eligible for registration in the Chinese Orange Book on the ground that these pharmaceutical method-of-use claims fall within the scope of “patents of crystalline forms,” which are not eligible for listing in the Chinese Orange Book. On February 24, 2023, the Company requested the NMPA to institute a nine-month stay against Convalife ANDA starting from the CNIPA’s acceptance of the Company’s request for administrative determination. On June 2, 2023, CNIPA decided that the generic drug in Convalife’s ANDA does not fall within the protection scope of claims 1, 3, 5 and 6 of Patent No. ZL201410082103.7 and claims 1-4, 7 and 9-13 of Patent No. ZL201080060546.6. The two CNIPA administrative decisions on NERLYNX® Patents have lifted the stay of Convalife’s ANDA by NMPA. On June 28, 2024, the NMPA approved Convalife’s ANDA to market a generic version of the Company’s NERLYNX® in China with the approval number of GuoYaoZhunZi H20244222.
Kelun China Litigation
Hunan Kelun Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd. (“Kelun”) filed an ANDA with NMPA in China seeking approval to market a generic version of the Company’s NERLYNX®. The ANDA application No. is CYHS2300221. On January 28, 2023, Kelun made Type 4.2 declarations against the four Orange Book Patents ZL201410082103.7, ZL201080060546.6, ZL200880118789.3 and ZL201710057547.9, alleging that its generic version of NERLYNX does not fall within the scope of the claims of the Orange Book patents. Kelun also alleged that Patents ZL200880118789.3 and ZL201710057547.9 are not eligible for Chinese Orange Book listing.
On March 13, 2023, the Company submitted four Article 76 petitions against the Kelun ANDA with the CNIPA and requested administrative determination that Kelun’s generic neratinib tablet falls within the scope of the claims of the four Orange Book patents. On March 21, 2023, the CNIPA declined to accept the Company’s request for administrative determination in relation to Patent Nos. ZL200880118789.3 and ZL201710057547.9, alleging that the listed claims are not eligible for registration in the Chinese Orange Book on the ground that these pharmaceutical method-of-use claims fall within the scope of “patents of crystalline forms,” which are not eligible for listing in the Chinese Orange Book. On March 24, 2023, the CNIPA accepted the Company’s request for administrative determination in relation to Patent Nos. ZL201410082103.7 and ZL201080060546.6. On April 17, 2023, the Company requested the NMPA to institute a nine-month stay against Kelun’s ANDA starting from the CNIPA’s acceptance of the Company’s request for administrative determination. On September 14, 2023, the Company withdrew the two requests for administrative determination in relation to Chinese Patent Nos. ZL201410082103.7 and ZL201080060546.6 at the CNIPA. On September 25, 2023, the CNIPA accepted the Company’s withdrawal request.
Demai Litigation
Zhengzhou Demai Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd (“Demai”) filed an ANDA with NMPA in China seeking approval to market a generic version of the Company’s NERLYNX®. The ANDA application No. is CYHS2402776. On August 26, 2024, Demai made a Type 4.2 declaration against Orange Book Patent ZL201410082103.7, alleging that its generic version of NERLYNX does not fall within the scope of the claims of this Orange Book patent. On September 30, 2024, the Company filed a lawsuit against Demai at the BJIPC based on Nerlynx Patent No. ZL201080060546.6 and on October 8, 2024, the Company filed a lawsuit against Demai at the BJIPC based on Nerlynx Patent No. ZL201410082103.7.
60
Table of Contents
ITEM 4.
MINE SAFETY DISCLOSURE
Not applicable.
PART II