A Delaware federal judge has imposed limitations on Liquidia Corp.'s patent defense strategies in an ongoing intellectual property dispute with United Therapeutics Corp. over rival lung disease medications, while still allowing the company flexibility to pursue alternative legal theories.
Court Ruling on Defense Amendment
Judge Richard G. Andrews of the US District Court for the District of Delaware issued an order Wednesday that struck two of Liquidia's invalidity theories in United Therapeutics Corp.'s 2023 lawsuit. The judge determined that Liquidia waited too long to raise these specific defenses, which included one theory tied to inventorship and another based on a publication.
Despite rejecting these late-filed theories, Judge Andrews provided Liquidia with an opportunity to maintain its defense strategy by allowing the company to substitute other arguments from what the court described as "twenty different" remaining theories available to the pharmaceutical company.
Timeline and Procedural Requirements
The court's decision came after rejecting UTC's objections to a magistrate judge's discovery ruling that had partially granted Liquidia's request to amend its defenses. Under the new order, Liquidia was given until 6 p.m. Thursday to identify two earlier-disclosed alternative theories to replace the struck defenses.
Background of the Patent Dispute
The legal battle centers on competing lung disease drug treatments between the two pharmaceutical companies. United Therapeutics Corp. initiated the patent lawsuit in 2023, challenging Liquidia's rival medication in what represents a significant intellectual property dispute in the pulmonary medicine space.
The case highlights the complex patent landscape surrounding lung disease treatments and the strategic importance of timing in patent litigation defense strategies. While Liquidia faces restrictions on its late-filed theories, the company retains substantial flexibility with its extensive portfolio of remaining defense options.
