Yesterday, Khushi and I wrote on the Semaglutide patent expiry and what it could mean for Indian generic companies and the general public. And while the market is seeing more affordable versions of the drug, a separate story is taking place in the Delhi High Court with Novo Nordisk filing a fresh set of trademark and patent infringement suits against generic companies.
The Ozempic Name Game: Novo Nordisk v. DRL Round 2
On Semaglutide injections, Novo Nordisk has filed a trademark infringement case (CS(COMM) – 317/2026) against Dr. Reddy’s, adding another leaf to their ongoing dispute over the anti diabetes and weight-loss drug. The matter was listed today in the Delhi High Court before Justice Jyoti Singh, where Novo Nordisk alleged that Dr. Reddy’s “Olymviq” mark is structurally and phonetically similar to its “Ozempic” trademark. On a quick search on the internet, I was only able to find that Dr. Reddy’s Lab is using “Obeda” for its Semaglutide injection. This point was raised by Novo Nordisk as well; however, Dr. Reddy’s Labs asserted that they are using both the marks for their version of Semaglutide. It seems a bit surprising that a pharma company is using two different marks for one product. By looking at the labels of Obeda and Olymviq, I am not able to find any difference between the composition of the two. Perhaps in the days to come, we might get clarity on how these two versions are different from each other (if at all).
Interestingly, after a public search on the Trademark Registry website under Class 5 (for Pharma products), I was able to find some seemingly phonetically-similar marks to Ozempic, such as OLUMPIC by Insecticides (India) Limited (2289705) (pdf), OLYMPRIX by Alkem Laboratories Ltd (3061061) (pdf), and of course, OLYMPIC by Comité International Olympique (International Olympic Committee) (4400190) (pdf).
Coming back to the case, Dr. Reddy’s Labs, in response to the allegation, argued that the impugned mark is being used alongside its well-known house mark “Dr. Reddy’s” and is using a different packaging. They further argued that the product could not be bought on impulse and could only be prescribed. This is an interesting argument, which, in my discussion with Swaraj, brought up another question: currently, are doctors mandated to only prescribe the international nonproprietary names instead of brand names? And if so, would this change how the analysis will be done? While there have been some developments on this front with the Supreme Court’s oral remark about making it mandatory to prescribe INN instead of brand names, I am not sure if there has been any further development in this direction. In case any reader has an idea, please let us know in the comments below.
Earlier in today’s hearing, the Court suggested that the counsel for Dr. Reddy’s Lab take instructions from his clients and see if they can come to an amicable solution and change the impugned mark. The Court expressed that the Olymviq and Ozempic do seem phonetically similar, as per the material on record. However, it did not issue an interim injunction nor pass any orders on merit. Giving an undertaking, Dr. Reddy’s Labs gave an assurance to the Court that it would maintain the status quo and not supply the impugned product in the market till the next date of hearing, which is March 27 (Friday). In the meantime, readers can take a look at these posts by Murali Neelakantan and Swaraj, and Aparajita on pharmaceutical products bearing similar trademarks.
Litigation on Semaglutide Tablets: A Tough Pill to Swallow?
Coming to the patent infringement cases, marking the beginning of another set of litigations concerning another Semaglutide patent, the Delhi High Court on March 20 recorded an interim agreement between Novo Nordisk and Torrent Pharma. Coincidentally, the order was passed on the same day when Novo Nordisk’s patent on Semaglutide injection (262697) expired. As per the agreement, Torrent has agreed to undertake that its products will not cross into the 0.6–2.1 mmol range of SNAC (sodium N-[8-(2-hydroxybenzoyl)amino]caprylate), which is an absorption enhancer, in its oral Semaglutide tablets for domestic as well as export purposes. The .6-2.1 mmol range falls under claim 1 of Novo Nordisk’s Semaglutide tablet patent (325669). Whereas, Torrent’s Semaglutide tablet has 0.53 mmol SNAC.
There is also another connected matter on this patent where Novo Nordisk has filed an infringement suit against Dr. Reddy’s Labs (again). While no orders on the substance of this matter are available on this, as mentioned by Dr. Amitavo Mitra in his LinkedIn post, the SNAC concentration might be an important aspect in this litigation later on.
The Semaglutide injection patent might have expired, but the IP war is very much alive between Novo Nordisk and its competitors! Just five days post-expiry, litigation is already firing on all cylinders, and one thing is crystal clear: this saga is nowhere near its final chapter.
[Thanks to Swaraj for his comments on the draft.]