A recent decision by the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey will likely cause a delay in a generic version of the drug Seroquel, a drug utilized in treating schizophrenia, from entering the US market. AstraZeneca prevailed in its motion for summary judgment against Teva Pharmaceuticals Ltd. and Sandoz, a unit of Novartis AG. The Court held that AstraZeneca had not obtained its patent for the drug through inequitable conduct and that the patent was valid. The issue of inequitable conduct was the only issue remaining in the case, since the issue of infringement and invalidity had already been conceded and jointly resolved in AstraZeneca’s favor.

In light of the ruling, introduction of the generic version of the drug proposed by Teva and Sandoz will be delayed. Teva stated it planned to appeal the decision.

After a slight stall last week, the U.S. House of Representatives on September 7, 2007 passed the Patent Reform Act, HR 1908, with a vote of 220 to 175. On September 10, 2007, the Bill passed to the U.S. Senate for review where it is expected to undergo further debate and editing and result in a different version.

U.S. Patent Office data reveals that North Carolina ranked 15th out of 20 states named in the nation in the number of patents issued to the State’s residence during fiscal year 2006, ending September 30, 2006.

North Carolina residents were issued 2,172 patents during that period. California residents received the greatest number of patents, numbering 23,579, followed by Texas as the second with 6,345 residents obtaining patents.

Novartis, Inc. of Basel, Switzerland challenged India’s patent office after its rejection of Novartis’s patent application for Gleevec, a cancer drug. The patent laws in India were amended in 2005 allowing applicants to obtain patents on medicines. The India patent office, however, later in January 2006 rejected Novartis’s patent based on a prior version of the drug.

Novartis challenged the India patent office in the court, which later dismissed Novartis’s claim on the grounds that it believed it did not have jurisdiction to rule on whether the country’s patent laws are in compliance with World Trade Organization rules.

Public-health groups are pleased with the decision as a preservation of India’s ability to produce inexpensive, generic drugs for developing nations.

Apotex, Inc. of Canada can no longer pursue its current plan to bring a generic version of Plavix into the U.S. market, now that the District Court Judge in the Southern District of New York upheld the patent held by Bristol-Meyers Squibb. Plavix brought $5.8M in sales in 2006, and is believed that sales would have been even greater had the generic version of Apotex not been introduced.

Unless Apotex appeals, the ruling allows exclusivity with Plavix until the patent expires in 2011.

In May 2006, Ariad Pharmaceuticals Inc., won a $65.2 million verdict from Eli Lilly & Company after a jury decided Lilly infringed on a patent licensed to Ariad by Harvard, MIT and the Whitehead Institute for Biomedical Research. In addition to the $65 million in back royalties, Lilly will have to pay $17.8 million per year in royalties until the patent expires in 2019.

Ariad’s patent license covers the process of influencing nuclear factor kappa B (NF-kB), which scientists from the academic institutions discovered in the 1980’s. The case drew national interest because it raised questions over the patentability of natural phenomenon.

Harvey J. Berger, the chairman and C.E.O. of Ariad, gave a simple response.

“The jury looked at the evidence, looked at this issue and concluded unanimously that the patent was valid and infringed,” he said in the New York Times.

After the verdict, Lilly said it planned to appeal.

Ariad is a biotechnology pharmaceutical company that employs a little more than 100 people. Lilly employs 42,000 and sold nearly $15.7 billion in pharmaceuticals in 2006, according to its Web site.