Background
Astellas Pharma, Inc., Astellas Ireland Co., Ltd., and Astellas Pharma Global Development, Inc. were plaintiffs-appellees in an appeal by Ascent Pharmaceuticals, Inc. from litigation in the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware. The appeal concerned the district court’s March 6, 2026 final judgment.
After entering a settlement agreement resolving all claims between them, the parties jointly asked the Federal Circuit to remand the appeal. Their request followed the district court’s August 5, 2026 indicative ruling that, if the case were remanded, it would partially vacate and modify the final judgment.
The Court’s Holding
The Federal Circuit granted the joint motion to the extent that it requested remand. The court issued the remand as its mandate on August 27, 2026, and directed each side to bear its own costs.
The court expressly took no position on whether vacatur was proper or necessary. It left that determination to the district court, instructing it to consider the principles stated in United States Bancorp Mortgage Co. v. Bonner Mall Partnership, 513 U.S. 18, 29 (1994).
Key Takeaways
- A settlement resolving all claims led the parties to seek a joint remand of the pending appeal.
- The Federal Circuit remanded but did not itself vacate or modify the district court’s judgment.
- The district court must independently evaluate any vacatur under the principles of U.S. Bancorp, and each side will bear its own appellate costs.
Why It Matters
The nonprecedential order underscores that settlement during an appeal does not automatically entitle the parties to vacatur of the underlying judgment. Even when the district court indicates that it would alter its judgment on remand, the propriety and necessity of vacatur remain questions for judicial consideration under U.S. Bancorp.