Court Requires Withdrawal Of Claims Filed In Another Jurisdiction

Posted: September 8, 2025 / Written by: Jeffrey M. Eilender, Thomas A. Kissane, Samuel L. Butt, Joshua Wurtzel, Channing J. Turner / Categories Commercial, Contempt

Court Requires Withdrawal Of Claims Filed In Another Jurisdiction

On August 4, 2025, Justice Andrew Borrok required defendant to withdraw all claims filed in Philadelphia that arose out of the License Agreement at issue or be held in contempt in Orphion Therapeutics, Inc. v. The Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia et al., Index No. 655222/2024. The Court explained:

Pursuant to the Prior Decision, the Court held that Section 15.5 of the Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia Patent License Agreement-Exclusive (the License Agreement; NYSCEF Doc. No. 3), dated October 28, 2019, by and between CHOP and Orphion, requires that all actions arising out of the License Agreement to be litigated in New York[.]…

For clarity, because the complaint included claims which not only arose out of the License Agreement but also arose out of the Vector Purchase Agreement (the Purchase Agreement; NYSCEF Doc. No. 4), dated September 11, 2020, by and between CHOP and Orphion, which provides that “[a]ny legal action involving this Agreement, or the Material will be adjudicated in the courts residing in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, without regard to its conflict of laws doctrine” (id. § 14.1), the Court required Orphion to file an amended complaint removing any claims that arise out of the Purchase Agreement. Unquestionably, the filing of a complaint in Pennsylvania which includes requests for relief as it relates to Orphion’s claims here that arise out of the License Agreement violates both the parties’ agreement set forth in the License Agreement, and this Court’s Prior Decision….

For the avoidance of doubt, CHOP must withdraw its claims from the Pennsylvania court to the extent that any such disputes arise out of the License Agreement pursuant to which the exclusive venue is the state and federal courts of New York (see NYSCEF Doc. No. 3 § 15.5), within three business days of this Decision and Order. If CHOP fails to comply with the unequivocal mandate set forth in the Prior Decision and in this Decision and Order, then Orphion may renew its request and this Court shall hold CHOP in contempt of Court.

Additionally, CHOP is ordered to bring a copy of this Decision and Order to the attention of the Eastern District of Pennsylvania Court by 10 am tomorrow morning.

Contact the Commercial Division Blog Committee at commercialdivisionblog@schlamstone.com if you or a client have questions concerning contempt.