Allergan & AbbVie v. Sun Pharma: Eluxadoline ANDA Consent Judgment
Allergan Holdings, AbbVie, and Eden Biodesign filed a Hatch-Waxman infringement action against Sun Pharmaceutical Industries over its ANDA No. 213447 seeking to market a generic version of Viberzi® (eluxadoline 100 mg tablets), asserting US11484527B2. The case resolved after 491 days via a consent judgment that enjoins Sun from commercialising the generic product for the life of the patent.
Hatch-Waxman ANDA battle over Viberzi® ends in injunction for AbbVie
On 24 July 2023, Allergan Holdings Unlimited Co., AbbVie US LLC, Eden Biodesign LLC, and AbbVie, Inc. filed suit in the District of Delaware against Sun Pharmaceutical Industries, Inc. under the Hatch-Waxman Act. The plaintiffs alleged that Sun’s submission of ANDA No. 213447 — seeking FDA approval for generic eluxadoline 100 mg oral tablets — constituted an act of infringement of US11484527B2, a patent covering formulations of eluxadoline, the active ingredient in the branded IBS-D therapy Viberzi®.
The case closed on 26 November 2024 via a court-entered consent judgment and stipulated order. Judge Richard G. Andrews ordered that Sun’s ANDA filing was an act of infringement under 35 U.S.C. § 271(e)(2)(A), and imposed a permanent injunction barring Sun from manufacturing, selling, offering for sale, or importing the ANDA-described generic product in the United States for the remaining life of the ‘527 Patent, including any extensions and paediatric exclusivities. All remaining claims, counterclaims, and defences were dismissed without prejudice, and both parties waived appeal rights under the stipulation.
At 491 days, the case resolved well before any scheduled trial — a pattern common in ANDA disputes where the commercial risk of generic entry incentivises negotiated resolution. The consent judgment’s express carve-out preserving future claims regarding the ‘527 Patent and products other than the specific ANDA 213447 product suggests the parties left strategic headroom for potential future disputes. Whether any licence or commercial arrangement accompanied the injunction is not disclosed in the public record.
Filing to Consent Judgment in 491 days
491 days — resolved before trial, consistent with negotiated ANDA settlements
Consent judgment entered: what the stipulated order means for both parties
Consent judgment confirms ANDA filing as infringement under § 271(e)(2)(A)
Under the Hatch-Waxman framework, filing an ANDA with a Paragraph IV certification is itself a statutory act of infringement under 35 U.S.C. § 271(e)(2)(A). The stipulated consent judgment formally adjudicates that Sun’s ANDA No. 213447 met this threshold — without requiring proof of actual commercial sale. This mechanism allows courts to resolve patent disputes before generic market entry occurs, giving brand-side patentees enforceable injunctive relief at the earliest stage.
Hatch-Waxman § 271(e)(2)(A)Allergan/AbbVie secures full-life injunction protecting Viberzi® exclusivity
The consent judgment delivers a permanent injunction blocking Sun’s generic eluxadoline 100 mg product for the entire remaining life of US11484527B2, including patent term extensions and paediatric exclusivities. Remaining claims were dismissed without prejudice, preserving plaintiffs’ ability to bring future actions against Sun or other ANDA filers concerning different products referencing the ‘527 Patent. The brand-side outcome is commercially strong — generic competition for this specific ANDA is foreclosed.
Injunction secured — patent life protectedSun enjoined from ANDA 213447 generic but retains future litigation rights
Sun Pharmaceutical is permanently enjoined from commercialising its ANDA No. 213447 eluxadoline 100 mg generic in the US for the patent’s life. However, the stipulation is explicitly without prejudice to any claim, defence, or counterclaim Sun may raise in a future action involving the ‘527 Patent and a different product. Sun also waived its right to appeal this order. The outcome suggests Sun may have assessed the litigation risk — or reached a side agreement — rather than contesting validity or non-infringement at trial.
Enjoined; appeal rights waivedViberzi® generic entry delayed; broader eluxadoline IP landscape remains live
The consent judgment effectively delays generic competition for eluxadoline 100 mg under ANDA 213447 for the remaining patent term of US11484527B2. For other generic manufacturers monitoring the eluxadoline space, this outcome signals that AbbVie/Allergan will enforce the ‘527 Patent aggressively. The without-prejudice carve-out on future actions involving other products or formulations suggests the IP perimeter around Viberzi® may extend beyond this single ANDA, raising the bar for any generic entrant in the IBS-D therapeutic category.
Generic entry blocked; sector on noticeFull party and counsel information
| Role | Name | Type | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Plaintiff | Allergan Holdings Unlimited Co. | Company | Pharma IP holding group (AbbVie/Allergan) — holder of US11484527B2 (Viberzi®)Search in Eureka ↗ |
| Co-Plaintiff | AbbVie US LLC | Company | Search in Eureka ↗ |
| Co-Plaintiff | Eden Biodesign, LLC | Company | Search in Eureka ↗ |
| Co-Plaintiff | AbbVie, Inc. | Company | Search in Eureka ↗ |
| Defendant | Sun Pharmaceutical Industries, Inc. | Company | Sun Pharmaceutical Industries, Inc. — generic drug manufacturer, ANDA filerSearch in Eureka ↗ |
| Plaintiff counsel | Jack B. Blumenfeld | Attorney | Counsel for Allergan Holdings Unlimited Co.Search in Eureka ↗ |
| Plaintiff counsel | Jeremy A. Tigan | Attorney | Counsel for Allergan Holdings Unlimited Co.Search in Eureka ↗ |
| Plaintiff law firm | Morris, Nichols, Arsht & Tunnell LLP | Law Firm | Representing Allergan Holdings Unlimited Co.Search in Eureka ↗ |
| Defendant counsel | Annie R. Steiner | Attorney | Counsel for Sun Pharmaceutical Industries, Inc.Search in Eureka ↗ |
| Defendant counsel | Charles B. Klein | Attorney | Counsel for Sun Pharmaceutical Industries, Inc.Search in Eureka ↗ |
| Defendant counsel | Dominick T. Gattuso | Attorney | Counsel for Sun Pharmaceutical Industries, Inc.Search in Eureka ↗ |
| Defendant counsel | Jovial Wong | Attorney | Counsel for Sun Pharmaceutical Industries, Inc.Search in Eureka ↗ |
| Defendant law firm | Heyman Enerio Gattuso & Hirzel, LLP | Law Firm | Representing Sun Pharmaceutical Industries, Inc.Search in Eureka ↗ |
| Presiding judge | Judge Richard G. Andrews | Judge | Delaware District CourtSearch in Eureka ↗ |
Official order — verbatim text
The consent judgment’s phrasing — formally adjudicating ANDA filing as infringement under § 271(e)(2)(A) while dismissing all remaining claims without prejudice — is precise and commercially deliberate. The infringement finding on the ANDA submission secures injunctive relief without requiring Sun to admit broader liability. The without-prejudice dismissal of counterclaims, including any invalidity or non-infringement defences Sun may have asserted, means the ‘527 Patent’s validity was never tested on the merits in this action, leaving it unchallenged and fully enforceable.
US11484527B2 — Eluxadoline oral tablet formulations (Viberzi®)
US11484527B2 (application no. US17/545584) protects formulations of eluxadoline — a mixed opioid receptor agonist/antagonist approved for the treatment of irritable bowel syndrome with diarrhoea (IBS-D) and marketed as Viberzi®. The patent covers oral tablet compositions at the 75 mg and 100 mg dose strengths implicated in Sun’s ANDA. As a later-filed formulation patent in the Viberzi® portfolio, it extends exclusivity beyond any earlier compound or method patents and is central to AbbVie/Allergan’s strategy for protecting the branded product from generic erosion.
For the IBS-D pharmaceutical sector, US11484527B2 functions as a key exclusivity barrier. Its explicit inclusion of patent term extensions and paediatric exclusivities in the consent injunction means that the effective exclusivity horizon for generic eluxadoline under this patent may extend materially beyond the nominal expiry date. Competitors seeking to enter the eluxadoline market must account for the full exclusivity stack — base term, PTE, and any paediatric designation — before projecting a commercially viable generic launch date. The without-prejudice carve-out in the Sun consent judgment also signals that AbbVie/Allergan is prepared to enforce this patent against any further ANDA filers.
Should you run an FTO analysis against US11484527B2?
Any generic manufacturer, contract development and manufacturing organisation (CDMO), or pharmaceutical company developing eluxadoline oral tablet products — including 75 mg or 100 mg formulations — should treat US11484527B2 as a live blocking patent. The consent judgment in this case confirms AbbVie/Allergan’s willingness and capacity to enforce it swiftly in Delaware. Even formulation or process variations may fall within the patent’s scope, and the multi-entity plaintiff structure suggests standing is well-established across the AbbVie/Allergan portfolio.
PatSnap Eureka’s FTO Search Agent enables R&D and regulatory teams to map the full claim scope of US11484527B2 against proposed eluxadoline formulations, identify any relevant prior art that may support an invalidity argument, and monitor for continuation applications or related patents in the Viberzi® family. Automated patent term extension and exclusivity tracking within Eureka can also project the true market-entry window, helping business development and legal teams make informed go/no-go decisions before filing an ANDA.
Run a freedom-to-operate analysis on US11484527B2 to assess your product’s exposure
Run FTO in Eureka →Similar Hatch-Waxman ANDA infringement cases in Delaware District Court
Explore comparable Hatch-Waxman § 271(e)(2)(A) ANDA infringement actions litigated in the District of Delaware involving branded pharmaceutical formulation patents.
What this case signals for the branded pharma and ANDA IP landscape
The Allergan v. Sun consent judgment reinforces how Hatch-Waxman injunctions can lock out generic competitors before a single tablet reaches the market.
Consent judgments in ANDA cases carry permanent injunctive weight
Stipulated consent judgments in Hatch-Waxman disputes are not soft resolutions — they carry the full force of a court order. Sun’s waiver of appeal rights and the court’s retained jurisdiction for enforcement mean this outcome is as durable as a litigated injunction. Patent holders in ANDA disputes should pursue consent judgment language carefully to maximise enforceability.
Without-prejudice carve-outs preserve future enforcement options
The express preservation of future claims regarding the ‘527 Patent and non-ANDA-213447 products is a deliberate drafting choice. Brand-side patentees negotiating ANDA settlements should ensure that resolution of one ANDA does not inadvertently waive rights against other pending or future ANDAs referencing the same patent. This case provides a clear model for that approach.
Allergan v Sun — key questions answered
The consent judgment formally adjudicated that Sun Pharmaceutical’s filing of ANDA No. 213447 was an act of infringement of US11484527B2 under 35 U.S.C. § 271(e)(2)(A). It permanently enjoined Sun from making, using, selling, or importing generic eluxadoline 100 mg tablets in the US for the life of the patent, including any extensions and paediatric exclusivities. All remaining claims were dismissed without prejudice.
The asserted patent is US11484527B2 (application no. US17/545584), covering eluxadoline oral tablet formulations. Eluxadoline is the active ingredient in Viberzi®, AbbVie/Allergan’s branded treatment for irritable bowel syndrome with diarrhoea (IBS-D). The patent was asserted in response to Sun’s ANDA No. 213447 seeking approval for a generic 100 mg eluxadoline tablet.
The without-prejudice dismissal of remaining claims, counterclaims, and defences means neither party is barred from raising those same issues in a future lawsuit. Critically, the order expressly preserves the right of both Sun and the plaintiffs to litigate the ‘527 Patent in future actions involving products other than the specific ANDA 213447 generic eluxadoline 100 mg product, leaving the broader patent dispute open for potential future litigation.
The four co-plaintiffs — Allergan Holdings Unlimited Co., AbbVie US LLC, Eden Biodesign LLC, and AbbVie, Inc. — reflect the distributed ownership and licensing structure that often results from major pharmaceutical acquisitions such as AbbVie’s acquisition of Allergan. Each entity may hold a distinct interest in the patent or the commercialisation rights of Viberzi®, and listing all relevant rights-holders ensures standing and avoids later challenges to the enforceability of any judgment or injunction.
No. The consent judgment expressly states that both Sun and the plaintiffs waived any right to appeal or otherwise move for relief from the stipulation and order. This is a standard feature of negotiated consent judgments and makes the injunction immediately final. The court did retain jurisdiction for purposes of enforcing the order, meaning either party can return to Judge Andrews if compliance issues arise.
PatSnap Eureka searches patents and litigation data to answer instantly.