Context: In late 2024, GlaxoSmithKline (GSK) sued Moderna in the United States District Court for the District of Delaware alleging infringement of patents relevant to messenger ribonucleic acid (mRNA) vaccine technology. The following year, it filed a European companion case at the Unified Patent Court (UPC) Hague Local Division.
What’s new: In their District of Delaware case, the two parties have jointly filed a stipulation of dismissal. In addition, Moderna has issued a press release confirming that all related disputes between the pair have been settled.
Direct impact:
- In its press release, Moderna stated that pursuant to the agreement with GSK, which settles “all disputes between the parties which were pending in the U.S. and Europe”, the parties have “granted patent cross-licenses in the field of infectious disease and are not obligated to make payments of any kind in connection with such licenses”.
- The joint stipulation shows all claims and counterclaims dismissed with prejudice, other than Moderna’s counterclaims regarding validity and enforceability of GSK’s patents, which are dismissed without prejudice.
Wider ramifications: GSK has enforced its patents on mRNA vaccine technology—used, most prominently, in various Covid-19 jabs—against several competitors. Other than Moderna, it has sued Pfizer and BioNTech (April 24, 2024 ip fray article). Elsewhere in the complex web of mRNA patent disputes, Moderna has been sued by CureVac (July 21, 2026 ip fray article) in both the U.S. and Europe, and by BioNTech in the District of Delaware (February 20, 2026 ip fray article). Both Moderna and BioNTech, as well as Pfizer and Johnson & Johnson, have been targeted in complaints filed by Bayer (January 8, 2026 ip fray article).
Moderna has also settled multi-jurisdiction litigation with Arbutus (March 4, 2026 ip fray article) over mRNA vaccine technology, agreeing to make a $950 million upfront payout to end the dispute. Moderna may have to pay an additional $1.3 billion if the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit finds it was not immune from patent infringement claims due to being a U.S. government contractor (June 2, 2026 ip fray article); oral arguments in that case were heard last week.
Accused products
- Spikevax (various versions, including original monovalent, bivalent BA.1, bivalent BA.4/5, monovalent XBB.1.5, monovalent JN.1, monovalent KP.2, LP.8.1, and XFG)
- mNEXSPIKE (including monovalent JN.1, LP.8.1, and XFG versions)
Patents-in-suit
- U.S. Patent No. 11,291,682 (“Delivery of RNA to trigger multiple immune pathways”)
- U.S. Patent No. 11,324,770 (“Delivery of RNA to trigger multiple immune pathways”)
- U.S. Patent No. 11,596,645 (“Delivery of RNA to trigger multiple immune pathways”)
- U.S. Patent No. 11,690,862 (“Delivery of RNA to trigger multiple immune pathways”)
- U.S. Patent No. 11,707,482 (“Delivery of RNA to trigger multiple immune pathways”)
- U.S. Patent No. 11,666,534 (“Methods of administering lipid formulations with viral immunogens”)
- U.S. Patent No. 11,786,467 (“Lipid formulations with immunogens”)
Stipulation of dismissal
Court & counsel
Judge: District Judge Gregory B. Williams.
GSK is represented by Richards, Layton & Finger’s Kelly E. Farnan and Sara M. Metzler.
Moderna is represented by Farnan LLP’s Brian E. Farnan and Michael J. Farnan.