Regeneron Pharmaceuticals Inc. v. Novartis Pharma AG

Background

The provided document is a filing by counsel for Novartis Pharma AG, Novartis Technology LLC, Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation, and Vetter Pharma International GMBH. The defendants asked the court to extend their deadlines to file responses to Regeneron’s complaint until 30 days after the court resolved Novartis’s pending motion to dismiss, transfer, or stay the case. They also asked the court to postpone the initial case-management conference, which was scheduled for October 30, 2020, until at least after the venue dispute was resolved.

Novartis argued that Regeneron’s claims substantially overlapped with claims in a pending patent-infringement case in the Northern District of New York and that Regeneron’s antitrust claims should have been asserted there as counterclaims. Novartis relied on the first-to-file rule, a doctrine concerning which court should proceed when related cases are pending in different courts. The filing argued that resolving venue first would conserve resources and avoid duplicative case management.

Parties’ Positions

The defendants argued that there was good cause to delay their responsive pleading deadline because they intended to seek dismissal under Rule 12(b)(6), which tests whether a complaint adequately states a legal claim, but that venue issues should be addressed first. They also argued that continuing the case-management conference would avoid work that might become unnecessary if the case were dismissed or transferred. The filing states that Regeneron did not consent to the requested extension and postponement and that Regeneron had raised concerns about delay.

Court Action

The provided court notation states that the plaintiff was ordered to respond to the defendants’ request by September 29, 2020. It does not show that the court granted, denied, or granted in part the defendants’ requests to extend the responsive pleading deadline or postpone the case-management conference. Accordingly, the document reflects a procedural scheduling order, not a decision on the parties’ venue, dismissal, transfer, stay, antitrust, or patent issues.

Disposition

In Regeneron Pharmaceuticals Inc. v. Novartis Pharma AG, Judge Halpern ordered Regeneron to respond by September 29, 2020. No further disposition of the defendants’ requests appears in the provided text.