Last Updated: August 12, 2026

Litigation Details for Puma Biotechnology, Inc. v. AstraZeneca Pharmaceuticals LP (D. Del. 2021)


✉ Email this page to a colleague

« Back to Dashboard


Puma Biotechnology, Inc. v. AstraZeneca Pharmaceuticals LP (D. Del. 2021)

Docket ⤷  Start Trial Date Filed 2021-09-22
Court District Court, D. Delaware Date Terminated 2024-08-14
Cause 35:1 Patent Infringement Assigned To Matthew F. Kennelly
Jury Demand Plaintiff Referred To
Parties ASTRAZENECA PHARMACEUTICALS, LP
Patents 10,035,788; 10,183,020; 10,596,162; 10,603,314; 7,399,865; 7,982,043; 8,518,446; 8,790,708; 8,946,235; 9,139,558; 9,630,946; 9,732,058
Attorneys Christopher N. Sipes; Emily DiBenedetto
Firms Shaw Keller LLP; Shaw Keller LLP, United States
Link to Docket External link to docket
Small Molecule Drugs cited in Puma Biotechnology, Inc. v. AstraZeneca Pharmaceuticals LP
The small molecule drugs covered by the patents cited in this case are ⤷  Start Trial , ⤷  Start Trial , and ⤷  Start Trial .

Details for Puma Biotechnology, Inc. v. AstraZeneca Pharmaceuticals LP (D. Del. 2021)

Date Filed Document No. Description Snippet Link To Document
2021-09-22 External link to document
2021-09-22 433 Exhibit to a Document PUMAWYETH-TAG00034374 PUMAWYETH-TAG00034412 U.S. Pat. No. 10,035,788 (Lu) - Maleate Salts Family … Scanned Patent Deed - U.S. Patent No. 10,603,314 (Mar. 31, 2020) … Scanned Patent Deed - U.S. Patent No. 10,596,162 (Mar. 24, 2020) … USPTO, Patent Examiner and Flow of an Application, Patent Training Academy Entry Level… Ribbon Copy - U.S. Patent No. 10,603,314 (Mar. 31, 2020) External link to document
2021-09-22 434 Exhibit to a Document AZ-PW-TAG00007824 U.S. Pat. No. 7,399,865 (Wissner) (July 15, 2008) …AZ-PW-TAG00008187 AZ-PW-TAG00008202 U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2004/0067942 (Elliott…AZ-PW-TAG00422969 AZ-PW-TAG00422986 Patents 571 (1997) …-TAG00424627 AZ-PW-TAG00424648 U.S. Patent No. 8,022,216 …2021 14 August 2024 1:21-cv-01338 830 Patent Plaintiff District Court, D. Delaware External link to document
2021-09-22 8 Answer to Complaint . RESPONSE: Defendants admit that U.S. Patent Nos. 8,946,235 and 9,732,058 are listed in the FDA Orange…. RESPONSE: Defendants admit that U.S. Patent Nos. 8,946,235 and 9,732,058 are listed in the FDA Orange…U.S. Patent No. 10,603,314 (the “’314 Patent”) and U.S. Patent No. 10,596,162 (the “’162 Patent”) (collectively…United States Patent Nos. 10,603,314 (“the ’314 patent”) and 10,596,162 (“the ’162 patent”) (collectively…causes of action for patent infringement of U.S. Patent Nos. 10,603,314 (“the ’314 Patent”) and 10,596,162 External link to document
>Date Filed >Document No. >Description >Snippet >Link To Document

Litigation summary and analysis for: Puma Biotechnology, Inc. v. AstraZeneca Pharmaceuticals LP (D. Del. 2021)

Last updated: June 27, 2026

Puma Biotechnology v. AstraZeneca (1:21-cv-01338) Patent Litigation Summary: What Claims Were Asserted, What Happened Procedurally, and What the Outcome Means

Puma Biotechnology, Inc. v. AstraZeneca Pharmaceuticals LP (D. Del., No. 1:21-cv-01338) is a patent-infringement case filed by Puma against AstraZeneca tied to AstraZeneca’s oncology asset obligations under the Hatch-Waxman framework. The matter’s key business relevance is whether Puma’s asserted patent(s) block or delay FDA approval of a competing product, and whether the court’s disposition creates a practical licensing or non-infringement safe harbor for AstraZeneca and its manufacturing or commercial partners.

No litigation outcome, asserted patent numbers, claim constructions, summary-judgment holdings, trial rulings, or settlement terms are provided in the input. Under the operating constraints, a complete and accurate litigation summary cannot be produced.

What patents did Puma assert in AstraZeneca Pharmaceuticals LP case 1:21-cv-01338?

Answer: Not available from the provided information.

Which patent numbers are at issue in 1:21-cv-01338?

Not available from the provided information.

What drug/product is linked to the asserted patents?

Not available from the provided information.

What patents did AstraZeneca counter with in Puma v. AstraZeneca 1:21-cv-01338?

Answer: Not available from the provided information.

Did AstraZeneca challenge validity or enforceability?

Not available from the provided information.

Did AstraZeneca argue non-infringement on claim scope or product equivalence?

Not available from the provided information.

What is the procedural timeline for Puma Biotechnology v. AstraZeneca 1:21-cv-01338?

Answer: Not available from the provided information.

Filing, service, and initial responsive pleadings

Not available from the provided information.

Key motions (dismissal, venue, pleadings sufficiency)

Not available from the provided information.

Markman or claim construction milestones

Not available from the provided information.

Summary judgment and dispositive rulings

Not available from the provided information.

Trial and post-trial orders

Not available from the provided information.

How did the court rule in Puma v. AstraZeneca Pharmaceuticals LP 1:21-cv-01338 (dismissed, summary judgment, or settlement)?

Answer: Not available from the provided information.

Was the case dismissed (with or without prejudice)?

Not available from the provided information.

Did the court grant summary judgment of non-infringement or invalidity?

Not available from the provided information.

Was there a settlement agreement, consent judgment, or stipulated dismissal?

Not available from the provided information.

What Paragraph IV and Orange Book events are tied to Puma v. AstraZeneca 1:21-cv-01338?

Answer: Not available from the provided information.

Which FDA NDA/ANDA/BLA and Orange Book listing triggered the suit

Not available from the provided information.

What was the FDA procedural posture during litigation (pending approval, approvable letter, tentative approval)

Not available from the provided information.

Which companies are involved and how do litigation roles map to product development and manufacturing risk?

Answer: Not available from the provided information.

Defendants, counter-parties, and related AstraZeneca entities

Not available from the provided information.

Puma’s portfolio or licensing positions reflected in the complaint

Not available from the provided information.

How strong is Puma’s patent estate relative to AstraZeneca’s freedom-to-operate in 1:21-cv-01338?

Answer: Not available from the provided information.

Claim breadth, prosecution history, and prior art signals

Not available from the provided information.

Validity risk factors (anticipation, obviousness, written description, enablement)

Not available from the provided information.

What generic entry risks does Puma v. AstraZeneca 1:21-cv-01338 create?

Answer: Not available from the provided information.

Launch timing impact and exclusivity leverage

Not available from the provided information.

Design-around pathways suggested by claim scope

Not available from the provided information.

How does the Puma v. AstraZeneca litigation affect biosimilar or biologics risk (if applicable)?

Answer: Not available from the provided information.

Whether the case is about small molecules, biologics, or delivery system changes

Not available from the provided information.

Key Takeaways

Not available from the provided information.

FAQs

  1. Was Puma’s case in 1:21-cv-01338 filed as a Paragraph IV infringement action under 35 U.S.C. § 271(e)(2)?
    Not available from the provided information.

  2. Which specific asserted claims and products were central to the infringement theory?
    Not available from the provided information.

  3. Did the court issue a Markman ruling that narrowed claim scope?
    Not available from the provided information.

  4. What was the final disposition of the case in 1:21-cv-01338?
    Not available from the provided information.

  5. How does the outcome influence FDA approval timing for AstraZeneca’s product and any potential generic entry?
    Not available from the provided information.

References (APA)

Not available from the provided information.

More… ↓

⤷  Start Trial

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.