Skip to content

Menu

LexBlog, Inc. logo
NetworkSub-MenuBrowse by SubjectBrowse by PublisherJoin the NetworkGet StartedSubscribeSupportContact
Search
Close

Genentech Files Suit Alleging Eli Lilly’s Taltz® Product Infringes a Newly Issued Genentech Patent

By Seth E. Cockrum on July 16, 2018
Email this postTweet this postLike this postShare this post on LinkedIn
The Great Seal of the US Gold

On July 2, 2018, Genentech filed suit against Eli Lilly and Company (“Lilly”) in the Southern District of California alleging Lilly’s Taltz® infringes newly issued U.S. Patent 10,011,654 (“the ʼ654 patent”).  According to the complaint, the ʼ654 patent issued at 12:00 am Eastern time on July 3, 2018, and the complaint was filed immediately thereafter.

Taltz® was first approved in the United States in 2016 and is currently approved for the treatment of adults with active psoriatic arthritis or moderate to severe plaque psoriasis who are candidates for systemic therapy or phototherapy.   Lilly also recently announced that Taltz® met the primary and key secondary endpoints in a Phase 3 study evaluating the safety and efficacy of Taltz® for the treatment of Ankylosing Spondylitis.

The active ingredient in Taltz® is ixekizumab, a humanized monoclonal antibody specific for interleukin 17A.  Ixekizumab functions by blocking the activity of interleukin 17A, a pro-inflammatory cytokine.   The newly issued ʼ654 patent is titled “Antibodies Directed to IL-17A/IL-17F Heterodimers.”  Claim 1 recites “[a]n isolated humanized monoclonal antibody that binds to an IL-17A/IL-17F heterodimer comprising the polypeptide of SEQ ID NO: 3 and the polypeptide of SEQ ID NO: 4 with or without their associated signal peptides.”  Genentech alleges that ixekizumab binds to the heterodimer specified in the claim, and thus infringes that claim.

In its prayer for relief, Genentech requests that instead of being granted a permanent injunction, it be awarded “a running or ongoing royalty adequate to compensate Genentech for ongoing infringement.” Genentech further alleges that prior to filing the lawsuit, it notified Lilly that the ʼ654 patent would soon issue and offered Lilly a license at a royalty rate to be determined by arbitration, but Lilly declined.  Taltz® reportedly generated U.S. revenue of $486 million in 2017.

We will continue to keep you apprised of further developments.

Photo of Seth E. Cockrum Seth E. Cockrum
Email
  • Posted in:
    Intellectual Property
  • Blog:
    Biosimilars Law Bulletin
  • Organization:
    Rothwell Figg
  • Article: View Original Source

Call us at 1-800-913-0988 or email sales@lexblog.com.

Facebook LinkedIn Twitter RSS
The Library at LexBlog
  • About LexBlog
  • The Field We Built
  • Library at LexBlog
  • Our Beliefs
  • Our Team
  • Contact LexBlog
  • Disclaimer
  • Editorial Policy
  • Terms of Service
  • Get Started
  • Publishing Solutions
  • Compass
  • Submit a Request
  • Support Center
  • System Status
Copyright © 2026, LexBlog, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Law blog design & platform by LexBlog LexBlog Logo