- Home
- News
- Articles+
- Aerospace
- Agriculture
- Alternate Dispute Resolution
- Banking and Finance
- Bankruptcy
- Book Review
- Bribery & Corruption
- Commercial Litigation
- Competition Law
- Conference Reports
- Consumer Products
- Contract
- Corporate Governance
- Corporate Law
- Covid-19
- Cryptocurrency
- Cybersecurity
- Data Protection
- Defence
- Digital Economy
- E-commerce
- Employment Law
- Energy and Natural Resources
- Entertainment and Sports Law
- Environmental Law
- FDI
- Food and Beverage
- Health Care
- IBC Diaries
- Insurance Law
- Intellectual Property
- International Law
- Know the Law
- Labour Laws
- Litigation
- Litigation Funding
- Manufacturing
- Mergers & Acquisitions
- NFTs
- Privacy
- Private Equity
- Project Finance
- Real Estate
- Risk and Compliance
- Technology Media and Telecom
- Tributes
- Zoom In
- Take On Board
- In Focus
- Law & Policy and Regulation
- IP & Tech Era
- Viewpoint
- Arbitration & Mediation
- Tax
- Student Corner
- AI
- ESG
- Gaming
- Inclusion & Diversity
- Law Firms
- In-House
- Rankings
- E-Magazine
- Legal Era TV
- Events
- News
- Articles
- Aerospace
- Agriculture
- Alternate Dispute Resolution
- Banking and Finance
- Bankruptcy
- Book Review
- Bribery & Corruption
- Commercial Litigation
- Competition Law
- Conference Reports
- Consumer Products
- Contract
- Corporate Governance
- Corporate Law
- Covid-19
- Cryptocurrency
- Cybersecurity
- Data Protection
- Defence
- Digital Economy
- E-commerce
- Employment Law
- Energy and Natural Resources
- Entertainment and Sports Law
- Environmental Law
- FDI
- Food and Beverage
- Health Care
- IBC Diaries
- Insurance Law
- Intellectual Property
- International Law
- Know the Law
- Labour Laws
- Litigation
- Litigation Funding
- Manufacturing
- Mergers & Acquisitions
- NFTs
- Privacy
- Private Equity
- Project Finance
- Real Estate
- Risk and Compliance
- Technology Media and Telecom
- Tributes
- Zoom In
- Take On Board
- In Focus
- Law & Policy and Regulation
- IP & Tech Era
- Viewpoint
- Arbitration & Mediation
- Tax
- Student Corner
- AI
- ESG
- Gaming
- Inclusion & Diversity
- Law Firms
- In-House
- Rankings
- E-Magazine
- Legal Era TV
- Events
Pfizer Emerges Victorious, Secures $107.5 Million from AstraZeneca in US Cancer Drug Patent Trial
Pfizer Emerges Victorious, Secures $107.5 Million from AstraZeneca in US Cancer Drug Patent Trial
AstraZeneca has been ordered to pay $107.5 million in damages to Pfizer. The jury found that AstraZeneca's popular lung cancer medication, Tagrisso, infringed upon the patent rights of Pfizer's Wyeth unit.
The jury concurred that AstraZeneca's medication violated two patents related to methods for cancer treatment using the breast cancer drug Nerlynx, marketed by Puma Biotechnology. These patents are licensed by Pfizer to Puma for the production of its drug.
A spokesperson from AstraZeneca expressed disappointment with the verdict but affirmed the company's confidence in its intellectual property position concerning Tagrisso. They stated that AstraZeneca will vigorously defend its rights in response to the verdict.
Representatives for Pfizer did not respond immediately to a request for comment regarding the verdict. Additionally, Puma is no longer involved as a plaintiff in the case.
According to a company report, Tagrisso generated nearly $5.8 billion in revenue for AstraZeneca last year.
AstraZeneca denied infringing the patents and argued that they are invalid.
In 2021, New York-based Pfizer, which acquired Wyeth in 2009, filed a lawsuit against AstraZeneca. The lawsuit contended that Tagrisso employed kinase inhibitors to treat cancer similarly to Nerlynx.
U.S. District Judge Matthew Kennelly is scheduled to conduct a separate bench trial in June to address some of AstraZeneca's remaining defenses. This trial could potentially lead to a ruling that nullifies the verdict.