Nexus Pharmaceuticals has filed a motion urging a Delaware federal judge to order a new trial on its patent infringement claims against Exela Pharma Sciences, arguing that a September jury verdict clearing Exela ran “against the great weight of evidence.”

In its Wednesday filing, Nexus contends that the jury’s decision — which found one of its patent claims invalid as obvious — lacked sufficient evidentiary support and was tainted by prejudicial accusations from Exela. The company has requested judgment as a matter of law or, alternatively, a complete retrial.

A Patent War Over Hypotension Drugs

The dispute centers on three Nexus patents tied to its Emerphed injection, used to treat low blood pressure (hypotension) in anesthetized patients. Nexus accused Exela of infringing these patents through its Akovaz prefilled syringe product.

But the September jury rejected Nexus’s infringement allegations on two patents and ruled the third’s key claim invalid for obviousness — a blow to the Illinois-based pharma firm.

Nexus argues that Exela’s case rested solely on a single expert’s opinion and a broad pharmaceutical textbook, accusing its rival of a “hindsight-driven seek-and-find” that cherry-picked evidence from scattered pages to create an illusion of obviousness.

Claims of Prejudice and Unfair Tactics

According to Nexus, Exela tainted the trial by making “aggravated and persistent” accusations that Nexus concealed data from the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office — claims that Nexus calls “prejudicial and misleading.”

The company maintains that these tactics, combined with Exela’s failure to counter Nexus’s proof of licensing agreements validating its patents, justify a new trial.

Exela Strikes Back

Exela, in its own motion filed the same day, sought to solidify the jury’s decision — asking the court to formally declare that it did not infringe Nexus’s patents and that all remaining claims are invalid.

Calling Nexus’s lawsuit a “windfall hunt,” Exela said the patents cover a century-old drug long used for treating anesthesia-related hypotension.

“The jury saw Nexus for what it was — a company trying to get a windfall payday to the detriment of patient costs,” Exela stated, noting that Nexus’s $89 million damages claim was rightly dismissed.

Legal Teams and Next Steps

Nexus is represented by attorneys from ArentFox Schiff LLP and Richards Layton & Finger PA, while Exela’s defense is led by Fish & Richardson PC and Chintapalli Law Firm PLLC.

The Delaware court’s forthcoming decision on the Nexus New Trial request could redefine how pharmaceutical patent challenges unfold in an era of escalating competition and innovation.