throbber
Case 1:22-cv-02229-MKV Document 63 Filed 04/04/23 Page 1 of 2
`
`quinn emanuel trial lawyers | new york
`51 Madison Avenue, 22nd Floor, New York, New York 10010-1601 | TEL (212) 849-7000 FAX (212) 849-7100
`
`WRITER'S DIRECT DIAL NO.
`(212) 849-7412
`
`WRITER'S EMAIL ADDRESS
`raynimrod@quinnemanuel.com
`
`April 4, 2023
`
`VIA ECF
`
`Hon. Mary Kay Vyskocil
`United States District Court
`Southern District of New York
`500 Pearl Street, Room 2230
`New York, NY 10007
`
`Re:
`
`Acuitas Therapeutics Inc. v. Genevant Sciences GmbH et al.,
`Case No. 1:22-cv-02229-MKV
`
`Dear Judge Vyskocil:
`
`I write on behalf of Defendants Genevant Sciences GmbH and Arbutus Biopharma Corp.
`(collectively, “Defendants”) to inform the Court that today, April 4, 2023, Defendants sued Pfizer
`Inc. and BioNTech SE (“Pfizer/BNT”) in the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey
`(“NJ Complaint”). See Arbutus Biopharma Corp. et al. v. Pfizer Inc. et al., No. 2:23-cv-01876-
`ZNQ (D.N.J.). The NJ Complaint, attached hereto as Exhibit A, alleges that Pfizer/BNT’s making,
`using and/or selling of their COVID-19 vaccine infringes five U.S. patents owned by Arbutus and
`licensed to Genevant.
`
`The NJ Complaint, which was filed after licensing discussions between Defendants and
`Pfizer/BNT failed to result in a settlement, strengthens Defendants’ pending motion to dismiss this
`action for lack of subject matter jurisdiction or in the Court’s discretion (ECF No. 43). First,
`although jurisdiction here is to be assessed as of the date on which Acuitas filed its Complaint
`rather than as of today, the NJ Complaint does not mention Acuitas or allege indirect infringement,
`thus showing that no controversy exists between Acuitas and Defendants even as of today.
`Second, two patents asserted in the NJ Complaint are not at issue in this action, confirming that
`Defendants’ controversy with Pfizer/BNT cannot be entirely resolved here. Third, whereas a New
`Jersey judgment would resolve Defendants’ U.S. patent infringement controversy with Pfizer/BNT
`(the actual makers and sellers of the vaccine), Pfizer/BNT may argue that as non-parties to this
`action they are not bound by a judgment issued here, potentially necessitating duplicative
`litigation.
`
`quinn emanuel urquhart & sullivan, llp
`ATLANTA | AUSTIN | BOSTON | BRUSSELS | CHICAGO | DOHA | HAMBURG | HONG KONG | HOUSTON | LONDON | LOS ANGELES | MANNHEIM |
`MIAMI | MUNICH | NEUILLY-LA DEFENSE | NEW YORK | PARIS | PERTH | RIYADH | SALT LAKE CITY | SAN FRANCISCO | SEATTLE | SHANGHAI |
`SILICON VALLEY | STUTTGART | SYDNEY | TOKYO | WASHINGTON, DC | ZURICH
`
`

`

`Case 1:22-cv-02229-MKV Document 63 Filed 04/04/23 Page 2 of 2
`
`Respectfully submitted,
` /s/ Raymond N. Nimrod
`Raymond N. Nimrod
`
`cc:
`
`
`All Counsel of Record (via ECF)
`
`
`
`2
`
`

This document is available on Docket Alarm but you must sign up to view it.


Or .

Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.

After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.

Accept $ Charge
throbber

Still Working On It

This document is taking longer than usual to download. This can happen if we need to contact the court directly to obtain the document and their servers are running slowly.

Give it another minute or two to complete, and then try the refresh button.

throbber

A few More Minutes ... Still Working

It can take up to 5 minutes for us to download a document if the court servers are running slowly.

Thank you for your continued patience.

This document could not be displayed.

We could not find this document within its docket. Please go back to the docket page and check the link. If that does not work, go back to the docket and refresh it to pull the newest information.

Your account does not support viewing this document.

You need a Paid Account to view this document. Click here to change your account type.

Your account does not support viewing this document.

Set your membership status to view this document.

With a Docket Alarm membership, you'll get a whole lot more, including:

  • Up-to-date information for this case.
  • Email alerts whenever there is an update.
  • Full text search for other cases.
  • Get email alerts whenever a new case matches your search.

Become a Member

One Moment Please

The filing “” is large (MB) and is being downloaded.

Please refresh this page in a few minutes to see if the filing has been downloaded. The filing will also be emailed to you when the download completes.

Your document is on its way!

If you do not receive the document in five minutes, contact support at support@docketalarm.com.

Sealed Document

We are unable to display this document, it may be under a court ordered seal.

If you have proper credentials to access the file, you may proceed directly to the court's system using your government issued username and password.


Access Government Site

We are redirecting you
to a mobile optimized page.





Document Unreadable or Corrupt

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket

We are unable to display this document.

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket