Company: SRPT
Filing Date: 2025-02-28
Form Type: 10-K
Source: 0000950170-25-029973
Chunk: 350

Company: Sarepta Therapeutics, Inc.
Filing Date: 2025-02-28
Form: 10-K
Item: Item 1
Chunk 350
---
 Partes Review for filing with the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”) at the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO”). The petition seeks to invalidate the ’274 Patent. On August 22, 2024, the PTAB instituted inter partes review of all challenged claims of the ’274 Patent on all asserted grounds. On July 13, 2021, Nippon Shinyaku Co., Ltd. (“Nippon Shinyaku” or “NS”) filed a lawsuit against the Company in the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware. NS asserted a claim for breach of contract arising from Sarepta filing seven petitions for Inter Partes Review (“IPR Petitions”) with the PTAB at the USPTO in which Sarepta sought to invalidate certain NS patents concerning exon 53 skipping technology (U.S. Patent Nos. 9,708,361, 10,385,092, 10,407,461, 10,487,106, 10,647,741, 10,662,217, and 10,683,322, respectively, and collectively the “NS Patents”). In addition, NS asserted claims for patent infringement and willful infringement of each of the NS Patents allegedly arising from Sarepta’s activities, including the sale of, its exon 53 skipping product, VYONDYS 53 (golodirsen). NS further sought a determination of non-infringement by NS alleged to arise from NS’s activities, including the sale of, its exon 53 skipping product, Viltepso (viltolarsen) and invalidity of certain patents licensed to the Company from UWA (U.S. Patent Nos. 9,994,851, 10,227,590, and 10,266,827, collectively the “UWA Patents”). In its complaint, NS sought legal fees and costs, an unspecified amount of monetary relief (treble damages) attributed to Sarepta’s alleged infringement, and such other relief as the court deems just and proper. In January 2022, the PTAB granted institution of all claims of all NS Patents in response to Sarepta’s IPR Petitions and determined that Sarepta demonstrated a reasonable likelihood of success in proving that the NS Patents are unpatentable. NS filed a motion for preliminary injunction solely seeking Sarepta’s withdrawal of the IPR Petitions, which was ultimately granted