直 Japanese PDF Font
  • Our Professionals
  • Our Work
  • Our Insights
  • Offices
  • Firm
  • Careers
Finnegan
    • AI + Finnegan
    • Appeals, Issues, and Legal Strategy
    • Diligence, Licensing, and Opinions
    • Global IP Enforcement, Litigation, and Trials
    • Patent Office Invalidation Proceedings
    • Prosecution and Portfolio Management
    • Trademark and Brand Management
    • AI, Electronics, and Information Technology
    • Chemicals, Industrials, and Materials
    • Communications
    • Consumer Goods and Services
    • Energy
    • Hospitality, Gaming, and Leisure
    • Life Sciences
    • Transportation and Logistics
  • Experience

Experience

Rare PTAB rehearing request granted for Finnegan client Incyte

Incyte Corp.

Concert Pharmaceuticals, Inc.

Incyte Corp. brought in Finnegan to handle a request for rehearing after the Patent and Trademark Appeal Board (PTAB) denied institution of Incyte’s inter partes review (IPR) petition against a patent claiming deuterated versions of the active ingredient in Incyte’s FDA approved Jakafi® product (ruxolitinib). The original petition was not drafted by Finnegan. The PTAB agreed with the rehearing request, which claimed that the original decision applied an overly restrictive standard for the lead compound analysis and for the reason to combine the prior art and granted institution. The PTAB rarely grants rehearing requests or institutes trial after an original denial. Finnegan successfully represented Incyte as lead counsel during the trial phase of the IPR, after which the Board in its final written decision (FWD) found all challenged claims of the patent-at-issue to be unpatentable. Finnegan also represented appellee Incyte before the Federal Circuit and secured a unanimous affirmance of the PTAB’s obviousness determination.

Incyte Corp. v. Concert Pharmaceuticals, Inc., IPR2017-01256, PTAB, Judges Fitzpatrick, Hulse, Yang, Smith, Franklin

Sun Pharm. Indus., Inc. f/d/b/a Concert Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. Incyte Corp., 19-2011, Fed. Cir., Judges Hughs, Linn, Stark

Tags

pharma patent strategy

Related Professionals

Mark J. Feldstein, Ph.D.
Partner
Washington, DC
+1 202 408 4092
Email
Jason L. Romrell
Partner
Washington, DC
+1 202 408 4349
Email
J. Derek McCorquindale
Partner
Reston, VA
+1 571 203 2768
Email
Daniel Rivalti, Ph.D.
Patent Agent
Washington, DC
+1 202 408 6028
Email
C. Collette Corser
Associate
Washington, DC
+1 202 408 6052
Email

Related Practices

Appeals from the PTAB

Appeals, Issues, and Legal Strategy

Patent Office Invalidation Proceedings

PTAB Invalidation Proceedings: IPR and PGR

Related Industries

Life Sciences

Pharmaceutical

Related Experiences

Finnegan successfully defends Incyte against institution of PGR proceeding

Incyte Corp.

FedEx Corp. v. Intellectual Ventures II LLC

FedEx Corp.

PTAB rules in favor of Finnegan client Neste Oil Oyj in IPR proceeding

Neste Oyj

Finnegan client Capsugel prevails in one of the first U.S. post-grant proceedings

Capsugel Belgium NV

Ajinomoto Co., Inc. et al. v. CJ Cheiljedang Corp. et al.

Ajinomoto Company, Inc. et al.

SAP prevails in first PTAB post-grant review decision

SAP America Inc.

Finnegan client AbbVie secures non-institution decisions for Humira® patents

AbbVie Biotechnology, Ltd

Incyte Corporation et al. v. Sun Pharmaceutical Industries Limited et al.

Incyte Corporation et al.

Risen (Suzhou) Pharma Tech Co., Ltd. v. Alzheon, Inc.

Alzheon, Inc.

Due to international data regulations, we’ve updated our privacy policy. Click here to read our privacy policy in full.

  • Privacy
  • Disclaimer
  • Legal Notices
  • Fraud Alert
  • EEO Statement
  • Cookies
  • Contact Us

© 2026 Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP