Short Summary
Marinus Pharmaceuticals seeks to invalidate Ovid Therapeutics’ 2022 ganaxolone patent covering methods for treating status epilepticus, arguing anticipation, obviousness, and lack of enablement based on prior publications and press releases.
Detailed Summary
In a Post‑Grant Review petition, Marinus Pharmaceuticals challenges U.S. Patent No. 11,395,817 owned by Ovid Therapeutics, which claims methods of treating status epilepticus with the neurosteroid ganaxolone. Marinus alleges that the Zhang patent publication anticipates the claimed methods and, when combined with Saporito conference posters and Marinus’s own orphan‑drug and Phase I press releases, renders the claims obvious under 35 U.S.C. § 103. It further contends that the patent lacks sufficient enablement under § 112 and that the USPTO examiner failed to consider these references during prosecution, making discretionary denial inappropriate.
Practitioner Note
This case demonstrates the evidentiary and procedural standards applied in patent matters before local courts. Understanding the court's reasoning in Ovid Therapeutics Inc. vs Marinus Pharmaceuticals, Inc. is valuable context for structuring arguments or assessing risk in similar proceedings.
Related Cases
MICROSOFT CORPORATION et al.vsLiTL LLC
The PTAB denied institution of the IPR, finding that the Petitioner failed to demonstrate a reasonable likelihood of success in proving unpatentability. The claims related to graphical user interfaces (GUI) were challenged under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a).
Microchip Technology, Inc.vsAptiv Technologies AG et al.
Aptiv Technologies withdrew its request for Director Review in the IPR against Microchip Technology, with Microchip not opposing. The withdrawal is made without prejudice to appeal the Final Written Decision.
CISCO SYSTEMS, INC. et al.vsInfoExpress Inc.
CISCO and FORTINET filed a Petition challenging 18 claims of InfoExpress's U.S. Patent No. 7,523,484 in the PTAB. The petitioners argue that the network access methods are obvious under 35 U.S.C. § 103 based on prior art references Krantz and Herrmann. This challenge is part of ongoing litigation against InfoExpress in District Court.
Meta Platforms, Inc.vsSitnet, LLC
Meta Platforms successfully secured institution of its IPR challenge against Sitnet LLC's patent 8249932, challenging claims based on obviousness over prior art. The Board accepted the Petitioner's arguments regarding claim construction and found a reasonable likelihood of prevailing on at least one ground.
Meta Platforms, Inc.vsSitnet, LLC
Meta Platforms challenges Sitnet's patent (8249932) in a PTAB petition, arguing that key claims related to targeted advertising and social networking are obvious. The petitioner asserts that combinations of prior art from Amidon, Walsh, Shahine, and Jones render the challenged claims unpatentable under 103.
Dealing with a patent challenge?
Whether it's a Section 3(d) rejection, a post-grant opposition, or a FRAND dispute, Arctic's patent litigation team has handled it. Get a strategy call.
Disclaimer: This page contains an automated summary based on publicly available judicial records. The content is generated for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Always verify details against the original source judgment before relying on this information for any legal purpose. If you believe any information is inaccurate, please contact us.