Amgen 2007 Annual Report Download - page 168

AMGEN INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
court declare all of the claims of U.S. Patent Number 6,410,516 (the “‘516 patent”) invalid and not infringed by
any activities related to ENBREL or Kineret®. The ‘516 patent is exclusively licensed to Ariad. Ariad was served
with the complaint on April 24, 2006. On June 14, 2006, Ariad filed a motion to dismiss with the Delaware Dis-
trict Court, which Amgen opposed on June 28, 2006.
On September 11, 2006, the Delaware District Court denied Ariad’s motion to dismiss for lack of subject
matter jurisdiction and denied without prejudice Ariad’s motion to dismiss for failure to name indispensable par-
ties. On September 25, 2006, Ariad filed a motion seeking certification for interlocutory appeal of the Delaware
District Court’s denial of Ariad’s motion to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. On October 5, 2006,
Ariad filed a renewed motion to dismiss for failure to name indispensable parties. The Court heard oral argument
on these motions on November 3, 2006 and granted Ariad’s motion seeking certification for an interlocutory ap-
peal. The Delaware District Court denied without prejudice Ariad’s renewed motion to dismiss and motion to
transfer. On November 17, 2006, Ariad petitioned the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (the “Federal
Circuit”) for leave to file an interlocutory appeal of the Delaware District Court’s September 11, 2006 denial of
its motion to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. Ariad’s petition to the Federal Circuit was denied on
December 29, 2006.
On March 27, 2007, the Delaware District Court denied Ariad’s renewed motion to dismiss for failure to
name indispensable parties or in the alternative to transfer. On April 13, 2007, the Amgen Entities filed an
amended complaint for declaratory judgment of invalidity and non-infringement against Ariad and the White-
head Institute for Biomedical Research (the “Whitehead Institute”). On April 13, 2007, Ariad, the Whitehead
Institute, Massachusetts Institute of Technology (“MIT”) and The President and Fellows of Harvard College
(“Harvard”) filed an answer to Amgen’s amended complaint and a counterclaim against the Amgen Entities and
Wyeth for patent infringement. On April 13, 2007, Ariad, the Whitehead Institute, MIT and Harvard also filed a
complaint in the Delaware District Court against Amgen and Wyeth for patent infringement of the ‘516 patent.
On May 30, 2007, Ariad filed a motion for leave to file amended counterclaims to assert additional claims
for infringement of U.S. Patent Nos. 6,150,090 and 5,804,374. Amgen opposed Ariad’s motion. The Court
scheduled trial for November 2008. The Delaware District Court granted Ariad’s motion for leave on Sep-
tember 13, 2007, and Ariad filed its amended counterclaims. On October 9, 2007 Amgen filed its reply to Ariad’s
amended counterclaims. The Court scheduled a separate trial in March 2009 on the two additional patents, U.S.
Patent Nos. 6,150,090 and 5,804,374.
On December 11, 2007, Wyeth and Ariad filed a stipulated dismissal without prejudice and the Delaware
District Court granted the motion on December 12, 2007.
Human Genome Sciences Litigation
On August 30, 2007, Human Genome Sciences (“HGS”) filed an action under 35 U.S.C. §146 against Am-
gen Inc. and Immunex Corporation (“Amgen”) in the United States District Court for the district of Delaware
(“Delaware District Court”) to review the judgment entered July 27, 2007 by the Board of Patent Appeals and In-
terferences in Interference No. 105,381. Amgen filed its Answer and Counterclaims to the complaint on
October 22, 2007 and HGS filed its reply on November 9, 2007. The Court ordered a Rule 16 scheduling tele-
conference for November 15, 2007. The Court called for letter briefs from the parties to clarify the issues on
appeal and to assist the Court in determining the scope of discovery in this action.
On November 30, 2007, HGS filed an action under 35 U.S.C. §146 against Amgen in the Delaware District
Court to review a Decision on Motions entered on July 26, 2007 and the Final Judgment entered November 20,
2007 by the Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences in Interference No. 105,240. On January 16, 2008, Amgen
filed a motion to dismiss the complaint with prejudice pursuant to Rule 12(b)(1) for lack of subject matter juris-
diction and Rule 12(b)(6) for failure to state a claim.
F-42