Wearne Digital Pte Ltd, which the complaint describes as a private company organized under the laws of Singapore, has sued Pfizer Inc. in the Southern District of New York. The case is Wearne Digital Pte Ltd v. Pfizer Inc., No. 1:26-cv-08691. The complaint is dated October 1, 2026 and file-stamped October 2. Its single count alleges direct infringement under 35 U.S.C. 271(a) of at least claim 9 of U.S. Patent No. 11,456,067, which the complaint says issued on September 27, 2022 (Compl. paras. 1, 4, 34; Count I); the patent is titled "Platform and system for use in therapeutic procedures."
What claim 9 recites
Claim 9 recites a method for managing the use of portable therapeutic platforms for a therapeutic procedure. It requires providing a plurality of therapeutic procedural packs, each comprising a therapeutically effective item required to conduct the therapeutic procedure and an electronic communications device having a unique identification code for receiving and transmitting information about the environment surrounding and including each pack. That information is transferred between each pack's electronic communications device and a computer system including a processor that processes it in real time, and an automated control response is initiated. The processed information must enable control over manufacture of the packs and their deployment to different geographic segments, and the computer system must be configured to initiate the automated control response by modifying a step in a therapeutic procedural pack manufacturing process so that the packs include determined therapeutically effective items.
What the complaint accuses
The complaint defines the accused method as Pfizer's management of a system for distributing vaccines, pharmaceuticals, or other therapeutic products that require cold chain or ultra-cold chain, using a cold chain or ultra-cold chain shipping container, a GPS-enabled data logger and temperature monitoring device, and a connected computer system for monitoring and controlling manufacturing and distribution (para. 59). The products it names include antibody-drug conjugates, monoclonal and polyclonal antibodies, recombinant proteins, and COMIRNATY, which it says requires ultra-cold chain (paras. 42-47). For venue under 28 U.S.C. 1400(b), it points to Pfizer's New York headquarters and its Pearl River, New York site, and alleges that Pfizer performs steps of the accused method in the district (paras. 12-15).
What it asks for
The prayer seeks a judgment of infringement; a permanent injunction or, alternatively, a reasonable ongoing royalty for adjudicated infringement continuing after judgment; damages under 35 U.S.C. 284 of not less than a reasonable royalty; interest, an accounting, and supplemental damages; and an exceptional-case finding with attorney fees and costs under 35 U.S.C. 285. The complaint states that any requested injunction should be tailored to proven infringement and account for continuity of access to vaccines and other therapeutics. It pleads direct infringement only, with no count for induced, contributory, or willful infringement. This post is based on the complaint; the Exhibit 2 claim chart was not reviewed.