OSRX, Inc. Responds to Jury Verdict in Trademark Infringement Case
OSRX expressed disappointment with the jury verdict in ImprimisRx v. OSRX trademark infringement case. The jury found OSRX and Ocular Science guilty of willful trademark infringement and unfair competition, awarding $34.9 million in damages. OSRX disputes ImprimisRx's claims about trademark ownership of pharmaceutical abbreviations like 'Pred,' 'moxi,' 'dex' and 'brom.' The company argues that these are generic terms in ophthalmology, citing a survey showing 70% of eye care professionals consider them generic. OSRX plans to challenge the verdict, with pending legal issues to be decided in December, including laches, unclean hands, and fraud on the USPTO.
OSRX ha espresso delusione per il verdetto della giuria nel caso di violazione del marchio ImprimisRx contro OSRX. La giuria ha dichiarato OSRX e Ocular Science colpevoli di violazione volontaria del marchio e concorrenza sleale, assegnando 34,9 milioni di dollari in danni. OSRX contesta le affermazioni di ImprimisRx riguardo alla proprietà del marchio delle abbreviazioni farmaceutiche come 'Pred,' 'moxi,' 'dex' e 'brom.' L'azienda sostiene che questi sono termini generici in oftalmologia, citando un sondaggio che mostra che il 70% dei professionisti della cura degli occhi li considera generici. OSRX prevede di contestare il verdetto, con questioni legali in sospeso che saranno decise a dicembre, tra cui laches, mani non pulite e frode presso l'USPTO.
OSRX expresó su decepción con el veredicto del jurado en el caso de infracción de marca registrada ImprimisRx contra OSRX. El jurado encontró a OSRX y Ocular Science culpables de infracción intencional de marca registrada y competencia desleal, otorgando 34.9 millones de dólares en daños. OSRX impugna las afirmaciones de ImprimisRx sobre la propiedad de las abreviaturas farmacéuticas como 'Pred,' 'moxi,' 'dex' y 'brom.' La compañía argumenta que estos son términos genéricos en oftalmología, citando una encuesta que muestra que el 70% de los profesionales del cuidado ocular los consideran genéricos. OSRX planea impugnar el veredicto, con asuntos legales pendientes que se decidirán en diciembre, incluyendo laches, manos sucias y fraude en la USPTO.
OSRX는 ImprimisRx 대 OSRX 상표 침해 사건의 배심원 평결에 실망감을 표명했습니다. 배심원단은 OSRX와 Ocular Science가 고의적인 상표 침해 및 불공정 경쟁에 대해 유죄로 판결하며 3억 4천 9백만 달러의 손해 배상을 지급하라고 결정했습니다. OSRX는 'Pred,' 'moxi,' 'dex' 및 'brom.'과 같은 제약 약어에 대한 ImprimisRx의 상표 소유 주장에 이의를 제기하고 있습니다. 회사는 이러한 용어가 안과에서 일반적인 용어라고 주장하며, 안과 전문가의 70%가 일반적인 용어로 간주한다는 설문조사를 인용합니다. OSRX는 평결에 이의를 제기할 계획이며, 부정행위, 청구권 소멸 및 USPTO에 대한 사기에 대한 법적 문제는 12월에 결정될 예정입니다.
OSRX a exprimé sa déception quant au verdict du jury dans l'affaire de contrefaçon de marque ImprimisRx contre OSRX. Le jury a déclaré OSRX et Ocular Science coupables de contrefaçon de marque volontaire et de concurrence déloyale, en attribuant 34,9 millions de dollars de dommages-intérêts. OSRX conteste les revendications d'ImprimisRx concernant la propriété des abréviations pharmaceutiques telles que 'Pred,' 'moxi,' 'dex' et 'brom.' L'entreprise soutient qu'il s'agit de termes génériques en ophtalmologie, citant une enquête montrant que 70% des professionnels des soins oculaires les considèrent comme génériques. OSRX envisage de contester le verdict, des questions juridiques en suspens devant être tranchées en décembre, y compris laches, mains sales et fraude auprès de l'USPTO.
OSRX äußerte Enttäuschung über das Urteil der Jury im Fall ImprimisRx gegen OSRX wegen Markenrechtsverletzung. Die Jury erklärte OSRX und Ocular Science für schuldig der absichtlichen Markenrechtsverletzung und unlauterem Wettbewerb und sprach 34,9 Millionen Dollar an Schadensersatz zu. OSRX bestreitet die Ansprüche von ImprimisRx zur Markenbesitz an pharmazeutischen Abkürzungen wie 'Pred,' 'moxi,' 'dex' und 'brom.' Das Unternehmen argumentiert, dass dies generische Begriffe in der Augenheilkunde sind, und verweist auf eine Umfrage, die zeigt, dass 70% der Augenpflegefachleute diese als generisch ansehen. OSRX plant, das Urteil anzufechten, wobei rechtliche Fragen im Dezember entschieden werden sollen, einschließlich laches, unclean hands und Betrug bei der USPTO.
- Won summary judgment on ImprimisRx's false advertising claims pre-trial
- Strong network of 5,500+ prescribers across the U.S.
- Lost trademark infringement case with $34.9 million damages verdict
- Found guilty of willful trademark infringement and unfair competition
- Legal uncertainty and pending litigation costs
- Potential business disruption if forced to change product naming
Insights
The
Key concerns include the jury's inability to consider evidence about ImprimisRx's compliance history and the lack of documented customer confusion. The damages calculation appears aggressive, claiming
This verdict poses substantial financial and operational risks for both companies. For Harrow (HROW), while the
The dispute over generic medical terminology could have industry-wide implications for pharmaceutical branding and marketing. OSRX's continued operations during appeals and legal proceedings may pressure Harrow's market share, while the final resolution could reshape competitive dynamics in the ophthalmic compounding market.
“Leading up to the trial, OSRX won summary judgment on ImprimisRx’s false advertising claims, and ImprimisRx abandoned its copyright claim,” said Dylan Liddiard of Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati, who defended OSRX. “The Court did not enter final judgment based on the jury verdict, as there remain significant legal and equitable issues for the Court to decide, including laches, unclean hands, fraud on the USPTO, and the sufficiency of evidence regarding damages. We look forward to having an opportunity for the trial judge to decide these significant issues in December. This is far from over.”
The case, brought by ImprimisRx, a wholly owned subsidiary of Harrow (Nasdaq: HROW), was tried in the United States District Court for the Southern District of
OSRX, Inc. contends that ImprimisRx relied on several false premises during the trial, some of which include:
- “Pred," "moxi," “dex” and "brom" are not generically used abbreviations within ophthalmology for prednisolone, moxifloxacin, dexamethasone and bromfenac and were not being used prior to ImprimisRx’ trademark filings.
- The trademarks “Dex-Moxi” and “Pred-Moxi” are not descriptive of the active ingredients in each medication.
- OSRX’s intermittent use of the abbreviations to accurately describe the ingredients in its own medications caused “significant confusion” among prescribers in the industry.
- 100 percent of OSRX’s sales were wrongfully gained through said confusion.
- ImprimisRx is entitled to 100 percent of all OSRX sales.
- OSRX is not entitled to “fair use” of these abbreviations to describe the ingredients in its medications.
- ImprimisRx was being truthful in its USPTO trademark applications when it said things like the abbreviation “TIM” could be mistaken by prescribers to mean “Traditional Indian Medicine” rather than Timolol, one of the most widely prescribed glaucoma medications in ophthalmology.
- OSRX was repeatedly asked to stop using the trademarks for many years, despite not a single cease-and-desist letter or email being produced to support that claim.
OSRX, Inc. asserts that these claims are patently false and widely recognized as such within the industry, pointing to the fact that Imprimis was unable to produce or name a single prescriber lost due to “customer confusion” and had no documented evidence of said confusion. Furthermore, the jury was barred from hearing evidence related to ImprimisRx’s checkered safety and compliance record – ranging from FDA warning letters and product safety recalls to severe adverse events and even a patient fatality – as a feasible explanation for why it has lost market share to OSRX.
In addition, the jury disregarded a genericism survey conducted by a leading national expert that found nearly
"Sadly, this is nothing more than a billion-dollar Big Pharma company using anticompetitive tactics to try and choke out a much smaller competitor so they are free to drive up the costs of medication and monopolize the compounded ophthalmic space," said Anthony Sampietro, Founder and CEO of OSRX. "Rather than competing with us on the playing field and allowing for consumer choice, they opted to exploit the jury process. We will not be bullied or acquiesce to these unethical tactics because if we do, it's the thousands of OSRX prescribers and patients across the country who have to pay the price. I founded this company to put patients ahead of profits, and I will continue to stand my ground on that issue.”
OSRX, Inc. is committed to defending its position and ensuring that its innovative contributions to the eyecare pharmaceutical market are recognized and protected. The company will explore all available legal avenues to overturn this verdict and continue its mission to provide high-quality, affordable eyecare solutions.
Case No. 3:21-cv-01305-BAS-DDL.
About OSRX:
OSRX is an FDA-registered 503B outsourcing facility committed to transforming ophthalmic care through quality compounded solutions. The
View source version on businesswire.com: https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20241122954252/en/
Media Contact: Vanessa Assam-Gorski, Marketing Manager – (541) 944-8531; vmgorski@osrxpharmaceuticals.com
Source: OSRX, Inc.
FAQ
What was the verdict amount in the ImprimisRx vs OSRX trademark case?
What trademarks are disputed in the OSRX vs ImprimisRx (HROW) case?
When will the final judgment in the OSRX trademark case be decided?
