ARTICLE · 23 MAY 2012

GSK And Genentech Settle Cabilly Patent Lawsuit

Beeser Ramamoorthy LLP

Explore more from Beeser Ramamoorthy LLP

GlaxoSmithKline and Genentech have settled a U.S. lawsuit related to Genentech's Cabilly II (US 6,331,415) and Cabilly III (US 7,923,221) patents.

United StatesIntellectual Property

Scott Beeser

GlaxoSmithKline and Genentech have settled a U.S. lawsuit related to Genentech's Cabilly II (US 6,331,415) and Cabilly III (US 7,923,221) patents. In the lawsuit, started in October 2009, GSK had sought a declaration that the Cabilly II / III patents were invalid, unenforceable and not infringed by the manufacture, use, sale, offer to sell or importation of GSK's ofatumumab (ARZERRA) antibody product. GSK is the development and commercial collaborator of the biotechnology company Genmab A/S.

No further terms of the settlement were disclosed.

Cabilly Background

The Cabilly family of patents generally relate to methods of recombinant antibody production. The Cabilly II application was filed on June 10, 1988, issued in 2001 and survived an ex parte re-examination by the USPTO in 2009. Claim 1 of the Cabilly II patent reads as follows:

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

Register for freeORLog in

Related Articles

Collaborate Now To Avoid The IP Dispute Later

United StatesIntellectual Property

Wolf Greenfield & Sacks

美国IPR程序与中国专利无效程序的区别

United StatesIntellectual Property

CCPIT Patent and Trademark Law Office

Returning Merits-Based Considerations To PTAB

United StatesIntellectual Property

Someone Designed Around Your Patent!

United StatesIntellectual Property

Dickinson Wright PLLC

USPTO Director Returns Merits Review Of IPR And PGR Petitions To The PTAB

United StatesIntellectual Property

Wolf Greenfield & Sacks

Legal Intelligence Newsletters: sign up for the latest legal and regulatory news on your chosen topics

Read more about

Related Comparative Guides

Comparative Guide

Patent Litigation

Comparative Guide

Intellectual Property

Comparative Guide

Franchise & Licensing

Comparative Guide

Trademark Disputes

See more popular content from

Intellectual Property

Denying Cancellation Petition, TTAB Finds That Roman Atwood's "SMILE MORE" Functions As A Mark

The Board dismissed this petition for cancellation of Roman Atwood's registration for the mark SMILE MORE for various goods (stickers, backpacks, shirts) and for retail store service featuring clothing, denying petitioner's claim that the term fails to function as a mark.

United StatesIntellectual Property

Wolf Greenfield & Sacks

Empowering Customers To Sell An Exonerated Accused Product

The Federal Circuit reaffirmed that the 1907 Supreme Court decision in Kessler v. Eldred is binding precedent that controls a preclusion analysis unless and until the Supreme Court overrules it.

United StatesIntellectual Property

McDermott Will & Emery

Transatlantic Top Tips: Series Of Intellectual Property Videos

Intellectual property is central to almost everything we do, as businesses or individuals. As a result, intellectual property rights are important assets to most modern businesses.

United StatesIntellectual Property

Womble Bond Dickinson

Pryor Cashman Team Recognized For Outstanding Trademark Practice

Top global brands, famous content creators, and media moguls know the best protection they can secure for their products is Pryor Cashman representation.

United StatesIntellectual Property

Pryor Cashman LLP

UMG v. DistroKid: When AI Becomes A Consumer Protection Issue

Universal Music Group's lawsuit against DistroKid raises a critical question about AI disclosure in consumer markets: when does the use of artificial intelligence become material information that must be disclosed to consumers? The case centers on allegations that DistroKid distributed mass-generated AI music while creating the impression it was created by legitimate human artists, potentially violating existing consumer protection laws even without specific AI disclosure requirements.

United StatesIntellectual Property

Frankfurt Kurnit Klein & Selz PC

PTAB/USPTO Update - October 2026

The USPTO has released new templates and guidance for AIA trial proceedings, announced key appointments including a Chief AI Officer, and published updated procedures for patent applications and subject matter eligibility declarations. Director Squires delivered multiple addresses emphasizing the constitutional importance of intellectual property rights while the agency expanded its community engagement efforts and international collaboration through WIPO's Global IP Assignment Platform pilot program.

United StatesIntellectual Property

The Trademark Scam Field Guide: Look-Alike Filing Sites, Fake USPTO Notices, And How To Get Out If You’ve Been Caught

A business decides to file a trademark. Someone on the team searches for a familiar online legal-services brand, clicks the first result, and lands on a site with a similar-sounding name, a polished design, five-star reviews, and a low flat fee. The application gets filed. Months later the business learns the “service” was not who they thought it was, the filing was signed by someone with no authority to sign it, and the USPTO has suspended the application along with hundreds or thousands of others from the same shop.

United StatesIntellectual Property

ICANN Announces Reveal Day And Key Deadlines For 2026 New GTLD Round

On Oct. 7, 2026, at 18:00 UTC, the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) will publish every new generic top-level domain (gTLD) application proceeding in the 2026 new gTLD Round, including who applied...

United StatesIntellectual Property

Greenberg Traurig

Is This Real? Navigating AI Impersonation Under New And Existing Laws

Is this AI-generated, or is it real? As generative AI tools have become increasingly capable of creating realistic images, videos, and audio, they have also made it easier to impersonate real people without their consent. In response, states are increasingly adopting laws that impose civil and criminal liability for certain AI-generated content that replicates an individual’s identity, likeness, voice, or other personal attributes.

United StatesIntellectual Property

Bots Need Not Apply: Copyright Office Report On Human Authorship Requirements (Video)

The U.S. Copyright Office recently released a report on the human authorship requirement for materials to qualify for copyright protection.

United StatesIntellectual Property

Lowenstein Sandler LLP