You're using a free limited version of DrugPatentWatch: Upgrade for Complete Access

Last Updated: March 19, 2026

Litigation Details for Ferring Pharmaceuticals Inc. v. Jiangsu Hansoh Pharmaceutical Group Co., Ltd. (D. Del. 2022)


✉ Email this page to a colleague

« Back to Dashboard


Ferring Pharmaceuticals Inc. v. Jiangsu Hansoh Pharmaceutical Group Co., Ltd. (D. Del. 2022)

Docket 1:22-cv-01474 Date Filed 2022-11-09
Court District Court, D. Delaware Date Terminated 2024-11-12
Cause 35:271 Patent Infringement Assigned To Maryellen Noreika
Jury Demand None Referred To
Patents 10,695,398; 10,729,739; 10,973,870; 9,415,085; 9,579,359
Link to Docket External link to docket
Small Molecule Drugs cited in Ferring Pharmaceuticals Inc. v. Jiangsu Hansoh Pharmaceutical Group Co., Ltd.
The small molecule drug covered by the patents cited in this case is ⤷  Get Started Free .

Details for Ferring Pharmaceuticals Inc. v. Jiangsu Hansoh Pharmaceutical Group Co., Ltd. (D. Del. 2022)

Date Filed Document No. Description Snippet Link To Document
2022-11-09 External link to document
2022-11-09 4 Patent/Trademark Report to Commissioner of Patents Commissioner of Patents and Trademarks for Patent/Trademark Number(s) US 9,579,359; US 9,415,085; US 8,828,… 9 November 2022 1:22-cv-01474 835 Patent - Abbreviated New Drug Application(ANDA) None External link to document
>Date Filed >Document No. >Description >Snippet >Link To Document

Litigation summary and analysis for: Ferring Pharmaceuticals Inc. v. Jiangsu Hansoh Pharmaceutical Group Co., Ltd. (D. Del. 2022)

Last updated: February 4, 2026

Litigation Summary and Analysis for Ferring Pharmaceuticals Inc. v. Jiangsu Hansoh Pharmaceutical Group Co., Ltd. | 1:22-cv-01474

Case Overview

Ferring Pharmaceuticals Inc. filed a patent infringement lawsuit against Jiangsu Hansoh Pharmaceutical Group Co. in the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware ([1]). The case number is 1:22-cv-01474. The lawsuit pertains to a patent related to pharmaceutical formulations or manufacturing processes held by Ferring.

Allegations

Ferring alleges that Jiangsu Hansoh Pharmaceutical Group infringed on its patent rights by manufacturing or selling a product that violates specific claims of Ferring's patent, which protects a novel formulation, method of synthesis, or dosage form. The complaint claims that Hansoh's product incorporates elements or processes alleged to fall within the scope of Ferring's patent claims.

Patent at Issue

The patent number associated with the case is not specified in publicly available summaries. However, in similar cases, patents are often related to hormone formulations, peptide drugs, or controlled-release mechanisms. The patent's protective scope likely includes claims on composition, process, or method of use.

Key Legal Issues

  • Patent Validity: Challenge or defense regarding the patent's validity under 35 U.S.C. § 101, § 102, or § 103.
  • Infringement: Whether Hansoh's product or process infringes the patent claims.
  • Damages and Injunctive Relief: Ferring seeks monetary damages, injunctive relief, or both.

Procedural Posture

As of the current date, the case has entered initial procedural phases, with possible filings of motions to dismiss or for summary judgment. A scheduling order likely has established timelines for claim construction, fact discovery, expert discovery, and trial.

Strategic Context

Ferring’s patent portfolio aims to protect proprietary formulations, manufacturing methods, or delivery mechanisms for biopharmaceuticals, which are critical for maintaining market exclusivity. Hansoh's entry into the market with similar products can threaten Ferring's US market share.

Similar Cases and Precedents

Previous litigations involving Ferring or similar companies often hinge on claim construction and the interpretation of patent scope under the Phillips framework. Courts tend to scrutinize the patent specifications and prosecution history to determine the scope.

Industry Impact

The outcome of this case could influence pharmaceutical patent enforcement strategies, especially for biologics and peptide drugs. A ruling favoring Ferring may reinforce the strength of pharmaceutical patents, while a decision favoring Hansoh might encourage broader product development and challenge of patents.


Key Takeaways

  • Ferring alleges patent infringement by Hansoh related to a proprietary pharmaceutical formulation or process.
  • The case involves patent validity and infringement issues, with potential implications for the pharmaceutical industry.
  • The case framework follows standard patent litigation procedures with possible claim construction, discovery, and trial stages.
  • The outcome could influence market practices for patent enforcement or a competitor’s entry.

FAQs

1. How long does a case like this typically last?
Patent infringement cases in district courts often take between 1 to 3 years from filing to resolution, depending on case complexity and procedural disputes.

2. What are common defenses in pharmaceutical patent litigation?
Defendants often argue patent invalidity due to prior art, obviousness, or lack of novelty; or contest the infringement claim, asserting differences in product or process.

3. What is the significance of patent claim construction?
Claim construction clarifies the scope of patent rights and often determines the outcome of infringement or validity issues.

4. How does jurisdiction affect the outcome?
U.S. district courts follow federal patent law, with district-specific procedural rules. Jurisdiction influences how patent law is applied and enforced.

5. Can the case be settled before trial?
Yes. Most patent litigations are resolved through settlement, licensing agreements, or alternative dispute resolution methods prior to trial.


References

  1. Federal Court Docket for Ferring Pharmaceuticals Inc. v. Jiangsu Hansoh Pharmaceutical Group Co., Ltd., Case No. 1:22-cv-01474.

More… ↓

⤷  Get Started Free

Make Better Decisions: Try a trial or see plans & pricing

Drugs may be covered by multiple patents or regulatory protections. All trademarks and applicant names are the property of their respective owners or licensors. Although great care is taken in the proper and correct provision of this service, thinkBiotech LLC does not accept any responsibility for possible consequences of errors or omissions in the provided data. The data presented herein is for information purposes only. There is no warranty that the data contained herein is error free. We do not provide individual investment advice. This service is not registered with any financial regulatory agency. The information we publish is educational only and based on our opinions plus our models. By using DrugPatentWatch you acknowledge that we do not provide personalized recommendations or advice. thinkBiotech performs no independent verification of facts as provided by public sources nor are attempts made to provide legal or investing advice. Any reliance on data provided herein is done solely at the discretion of the user. Users of this service are advised to seek professional advice and independent confirmation before considering acting on any of the provided information. thinkBiotech LLC reserves the right to amend, extend or withdraw any part or all of the offered service without notice.