Court Opinion

ID: 4908213
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2021-09-03 15:03:29.470787+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T08:13:01.622963
License: Public Domain

Case: 20-2229    Document: 80    Page: 1   Filed: 09/03/2021

        NOTE: This disposition is nonprecedential.

   United States Court of Appeals
       for the Federal Circuit
                  ______________________

   BRISTOL-MYERS SQUIBB COMPANY, PFIZER
                     INC.,
              Plaintiffs-Appellees

                            v.

  SIGMAPHARM LABORATORIES, LLC, SUNSHINE
  LAKE PHARMA CO. LTD., HEC PHARM USA INC.,
        UNICHEM LABORATORIES, LTD.,
              Defendants-Appellants
             ______________________

             2020-2229, 2020-2252, 2020-2258
                 ______________________

     Appeals from the United States District Court for the
 District of Delaware in Nos. 1:17-cv-00374-LPS, 1:17-cv-
 00380-LPS, 1:17-cv-00382-LPS, 1:17-cv-00408-LPS, Judge
 Leonard P. Stark.
                  ______________________

                Decided: September 3, 2021
                  ______________________

     WILLIAM F. LEE, Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and
 Dorr LLP, Boston, MA, argued for plaintiffs-appellees.
 Also represented by TIMOTHY ANDREW COOK, ANDREW J.
 DANFORD, KATHERINE P. KIECKHAFER, MADELEINE C.
 LAUPHEIMER, KEVIN SCOTT PRUSSIA; HEATHER M.
 PETRUZZI, AMY K. WIGMORE, Washington, DC.
Case: 20-2229     Document: 80      Page: 2     Filed: 09/03/2021

 2                           BRISTOL-MYERS SQUIBB COMPANY v.
                                   SIGMAPHARM LABORATORIES

     PAUL HILGER KOCHANSKI, Lerner, David, Littenberg,
 Krumholz & Mentlik, LLP, Cranford, NJ, argued for de-
 fendants-appellants Sunshine Lake Pharma Co. Ltd., HEC
 Pharm USA Inc. Also represented by KENDALL K. GURULE,
 WILLIAM L. MENTLIK, TEDD W. VAN BUSKIRK.

    PETER BRANKO PEJIC, Greenblum & Bernstein, P.L.C.,
 Reston, VA, argued for defendant-appellant Unichem La-
 boratories, Ltd. Also represented by PAUL BRAIER, JILL
 BROWNING.

    DONALD J. MIZERK, Husch Blackwell LLP, Chicago, IL,
 argued for defendant-appellant Sigmapharm Laboratories,
 LLC. Also represented by PHILIP D. SEGREST, JR., MARC
 RICHARD WEZOWSKI; THOMAS P. HENEGHAN, Madison, WI;
 DUSTIN TAYLOR, Denver, CO.
                  ______________________

     Before MOORE, Chief Judge, NEWMAN and O’MALLEY,
                      Circuit Judges.
 O’MALLEY, Circuit Judge.
      Having reviewed the district court’s thorough and
 thoughtful opinion, we affirm. We specifically adopt its
 construction of the following terms from U.S. Patent No.
 6,967,208 (“the ’208 patent”): (1) “substituted with [N] R,”
 see Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. v. Aurobindo Pharma USA
 Inc., 477 F. Supp. 3d 306, 340 (D. Del. 2020), and (2) “phar-
 maceutically acceptable salts,” see id. at 312 ¶ 13. And, we
 adopt its construction of the following terms from U.S. Pa-
 tent No. 9,326,945 (“the ’945 patent”): (1) “apixaban parti-
 cles have a D90 equal to or less than about 89 microns,” see
 id. at 313 ¶ 19, and (2) “crystalline apixaban particles,” see
 id. We also find no error, and certainly no clear error, in
 the district court’s findings of fact, including its expert wit-
 ness credibility determinations. Because we believe the
 district court’s patent infringement and invalidity
Case: 20-2229   Document: 80         Page: 3   Filed: 09/03/2021

 BRISTOL-MYERS SQUIBB COMPANY   v.                           3
 SIGMAPHARM LABORATORIES

 determinations flow directly from its claim construction
 and factual findings, we affirm.
                      AFFIRMED