Short Summary
Nexus Pharmaceuticals has filed a PGR petition challenging all 30 claims of Exela Pharma Sciences' L‑cysteine parenteral nutrition patent, asserting lack of enablement, insufficient written description, and, alternatively, obviousness over the Sandoz label.
Detailed Summary
In a petition for post‑grant review of U.S. Patent No. 11,642,370, Nexus Pharmaceuticals contends that the patent’s claims covering stable L‑cysteine solutions for total parenteral nutrition are not enabled because the specification provides only narrow examples and does not teach how to achieve the broad ranges of aluminum, oxygen, pH, and concentration without undue experimentation. The petition also argues that the specification lacks a sufficient written description to support the full claim scope. As an alternative, Nexus asserts obviousness over the publicly available Sandoz label and related prior art, should the enablement arguments fail. The petition seeks cancellation of all 30 claims and references extensive district‑court findings and prior PTAB proceedings involving related patents.
Practitioner Note
This case demonstrates the evidentiary and procedural standards applied in patent matters before local courts. Understanding the court's reasoning in Nexus Pharmaceuticals LLC vs Exela Pharma Sciences, LLC is valuable context for structuring arguments or assessing risk in similar proceedings.
Related Cases
Alpinestars S.p.A et al.vsDainese S.p.A.
Alpinestars S.p.A et al.'s IPR challenge against Dainese's inflatable safety device patent was denied by the PTAB. The Board found that the petitioner failed to demonstrate a reasonable likelihood of prevailing on any challenged claim, despite arguments regarding obviousness over prior art combinations.
United Services Automobile AssociationvsAuto Telematics Ltd.
The USPTO denied USAA's request for Director Review of the institution decision in IPR2025-00812, leaving the institution of the auto‑telematics patent intact.
FUJIFILM Corporation et al.vsOptimum Imaging Technologies LLC
Fujifilm and Optimum Imaging Technologies have reached a settlement-in-principle in their IPR dispute, requesting a 60‑day stay to finalize dismissal. The parties will file a stipulation of dismissal within two months.
DELL INC. et al.vsAX Wireless, LLC et al.
Dell and AX Wireless have jointly moved to terminate the IPR over patent 11,212,146 after reaching a settlement. The motion cites statutory authority for termination and notes that the Board has not yet decided the merits.
Bizlink Technology, Inc., et al.vsAnder Power Products, Inc.
Bizlink Technology, Inc. petitioned the PTAB to challenge Anderson Power Products' patent (8808017), arguing that claims are unpatentable based on anticipation and obviousness. The petitioner cited multiple prior art references, including Winkler, Kataoka, Poliak, and The Handbook. The petition was instituted by the Board.
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.