Pfizer Inc & Anor v Modernatx Inc

Pfizer Inc & Anor v Modernatx Inc

Moderna's October 2020 pledge amounted to non-contractual consent to acts that would otherwise infringe the UK patents, but this consent was revocable and was validly revoked by the March 2022 statement. There was no binding unilateral contract under Massachusetts law because there was no offer, acceptance, or...

Source-derived case information.

Parties
Claimant/defendant: Pfizer Inc.; Claimant/defendant: BioNTech SE; Claimant/defendant: ModernaTX, Inc.; Defendant: Pfizer Limited; Defendant: Pfizer Manufacturing Belgium NV; Defendant: BioNTech Manufacturing GmbH
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
07 February 2024
Procedural Posture
Patent Infringement and Revocation Claims (consolidated) / Judgment After Trial on Preliminary Legal Issues (consent/waiver/contractual Defence)
Outcome
Pfizer/BioNTech had a defence of consent to infringement for acts between 8 October 2020 and 7 March 2022; no defence thereafter. No binding contract or waiver found.
Legal Topics
Patent Infringement, Consent as a Defence, Waiver of Rights, Unilateral Contract, Choice of Law, Interpretation of Public Pledges/statements
Intellectual Property Patents Conflict of Laws Patent Infringement Consent as a Defence Waiver of Rights Unilateral Contract Choice of Law +1 more

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 13 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Pfizer Inc.

Claimant/defendant

BioNTech SE

Claimant/defendant

ModernaTX, Inc.

Claimant/defendant

Pfizer Limited

Defendant

Pfizer Manufacturing Belgium NV

Defendant

BioNTech Manufacturing GmbH

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Patent Infringement and Revocation Claims (consolidated) / Judgment After Trial on Preliminary Legal Issues (consent/waiver/contractual Defence)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Moderna's public pledge not to enforce COVID-19 patents constituted consent under s60 Patents Act 1977 to acts by Pfizer/BioNTech
  2. 2 Whether the pledge gave rise to a binding unilateral contract under Massachusetts law
  3. 3 Whether the pledge amounted to a waiver of rights under US federal law

Ratio Decidendi

Moderna's October 2020 pledge amounted to non-contractual consent to acts that would otherwise infringe the UK patents, but this consent was revocable and was validly revoked by the March 2022 statement. There was no binding unilateral contract under Massachusetts law because there was no offer, acceptance, or consideration. The pledge did not amount to a waiver of rights under US federal law. Accordingly, Pfizer/BioNTech had a defence to infringement only for acts between 8 October 2020 and 7 March 2022.

Court Disposition

Pfizer/BioNTech had a defence of consent to infringement for acts between 8 October 2020 and 7 March 2022; no defence thereafter. No binding contract or waiver found.

Orders

  • Declaration that Pfizer/BioNTech had consent to acts otherwise infringing the patents between 8 October 2020 and 7 March 2022
  • No declaration of contract or waiver; claims for ongoing consent/waiver dismissed