Amazentis SA v. Codeage LLC

I. Executive Summary and Procedural Information

• Parties & Counsel:
  • Plaintiff: Amazentis SA (Switzerland) and Timeline Longevity, Inc. (Delaware)
  • Defendant: Codeage LLC (Delaware)
  • Plaintiff's Counsel: Foley Hoag LLP; Ashby & Geddes
• Case Identification: 1:26-cv-00249, D. Del., 03/09/2026
• Venue Allegations: Venue is alleged to be proper in the District of Delaware because the Defendant is a Delaware corporation and has allegedly committed acts of infringement in the district.
• Core Dispute: Plaintiff alleges that Defendant's urolithin A dietary supplements infringe four U.S. patents related to methods of using urolithins to improve mitochondrial function and autophagy, as well as compositions containing urolithins.
• Technical Context: The technology lies in the field of nutritional supplements and healthy aging, focusing on the administration of urolithin A, a metabolite of compounds found in pomegranates, to stimulate cellular renewal processes.
• Key Procedural History: The complaint alleges that Plaintiff Amazentis provided Defendant Codeage with pre-suit notice of infringement of U.S. Patent Nos. 10,485,782 and 11,020,373 via a letter dated March 8, 2023. A follow-up letter was allegedly sent on August 23, 2024. This history is presented to support allegations of willful infringement.

Case Timeline

II. Technology and Patent(s)-in-Suit Analysis

U.S. Patent No. 10,485,782 - "Compositions and Methods for Improving Mitochondrial Function and Treating Neurodegenerative Diseases and Cognitive Disorders" (issued Nov. 26, 2019)

The Invention Explained

• Problem Addressed: The patent addresses the age-related decline in mitochondrial energy production, which is associated with degenerative diseases and cognitive decline '782 Patent, col. 1:12-18 It notes that natural dietary precursors to beneficial compounds, such as ellagitannins, are often poorly absorbed by the human gut '782 Patent, col. 1:52-56
• The Patented Solution: The invention proposes directly administering urolithins, which are metabolites of ellagitannins, to a subject to bypass the inefficient gut metabolism of precursors '782 Patent, col. 1:57-67 This direct administration is claimed to increase or maintain mitochondrial function, which can be used advantageously in both healthy individuals and for treating diseases related to mitochondrial dysfunction '782 Patent, abstract
• Technical Importance: This approach provides a method for delivering a consistent and effective dose of the active compound (urolithin) to improve cellular energy production, avoiding the variability of individual gut microflora metabolism.

Key Claims at a Glance

• The complaint asserts independent claims 1 and 2 Compl. ¶45 Compl. ¶48
• Independent Claim 1 recites a method with the following essential elements:
  • A method of increasing or maintaining mitochondrial function,
  • comprising: administering to a subject in need thereof an effective amount of a urolithin,
  • thereby increasing or maintaining mitochondrial function.
• Independent Claim 2 recites a method with the following essential elements:
  • A method of treating, preventing, or managing a mitochondria-related disease or condition associated with altered mitochondrial function or a reduced mitochondrial density,
  • comprising: administering to a subject in need thereof a therapeutically effective amount of a urolithin,
  • thereby treating, preventing, or managing the disease or condition.
• The complaint reserves the right to assert numerous dependent claims that further specify the urolithin as urolithin A, the subject as a human, and the administration as oral Compl. ¶47 Compl. ¶50

U.S. Patent No. 11,020,373 - "Enhancing Autophagy Or Increasing Longevity By Administration Of Urolithins Or Precursors Thereof" (issued Jun. 1, 2021)

The Invention Explained

• Problem Addressed: The patent background describes that autophagy, a fundamental cellular process for degrading and recycling damaged cell components, diminishes with age '373 Patent, col. 1:26-32 This decline is associated with various age-related health issues '373 Patent, col. 1:32-35
• The Patented Solution: The invention claims a method of increasing autophagy in healthy humans by orally administering urolithin A within a specific dosage range '373 Patent, abstract '373 Patent, claim 1 This is intended to enhance longevity and counteract age-related decline.
• Technical Importance: The invention provides a specific method and dosage for stimulating a key cellular maintenance pathway, offering a targeted approach to address a known mechanism of cellular aging.

Key Claims at a Glance

• The complaint asserts independent claim 1 Compl. ¶54
• Independent Claim 1 recites a method with the following essential elements:
  • A method of increasing autophagy,
  • comprising the step of orally administering to a healthy human in need thereof an effective amount of urolithin A, or a pharmaceutically acceptable salt thereof,
  • wherein the healthy human is not suffering from cancer or predisposed to developing cancer,
  • autophagy in the healthy human is increased, and
  • the effective amount is about 70 mg to about 1050 mg.
• The complaint also asserts dependent claims, including claim 10 which narrows the effective amount to "about 500 mg" Compl. ¶56

Multi-Patent Capsule: U.S. Patent No. 12,310,943

• Patent Identification: U.S. Patent No. 12,310,943, "Compositions and Methods for Improving Mitochondrial Function and Treating Neurodegenerative Diseases and Cognitive Disorders," issued May 27, 2025 Compl. ¶28
• Technology Synopsis: The patent claims methods for enhancing muscle performance and for increasing or maintaining mitochondrial function by administering an effective amount of a urolithin to a mammal Compl. ¶60 Compl. ¶63 The claims specify dosage ranges, including 300-500 mg/day Compl. ¶60 Compl. ¶63
• Asserted Claims: Independent claims 1 and 2 Compl. ¶60 Compl. ¶63
• Accused Features: The complaint alleges that Defendant's product, which contains 500 mg of urolithin A per serving, is marketed for and used by consumers to enhance muscle performance and mitochondrial function, falling within the claimed dosage ranges Compl. ¶61 Compl. ¶64

Multi-Patent Capsule: U.S. Patent No. 12,544,358

• Patent Identification: U.S. Patent No. 12,544,358, "Enhancing Autophagy or Increasing Longevity by Administration of Urolithins," issued February 10, 2026 Compl. ¶31
• Technology Synopsis: The patent claims a composition comprising urolithin A and a second ingredient selected from resveratrol and coenzyme Q10 Compl. ¶70 The claim further specifies that if coenzyme Q10 is present, it must be in the form of ubiquinol or ubiquinone Compl. ¶70
• Asserted Claims: Independent claim 1 Compl. ¶70
• Accused Features: The accused product is alleged to be a composition containing urolithin A, resveratrol, and coenzyme Q10 Compl. ¶43 Compl. ¶71 The complaint further alleges that the coenzyme Q10 in the accused product is specifically in the ubiquinone form, as stated in a Q&A section on Defendant's website Compl. ¶72

III. The Accused Instrumentality

Product Identification

• The accused product is the "Codeage Liposomal Urolithin A supplement" Compl. ¶39

Functionality and Market Context

• The product is a dietary supplement sold in capsule form for oral administration (Compl. ¶36; Compl. ¶56, item g).
• Each serving purportedly contains 500 mg of urolithin A, 150 mg of trans-resveratrol, and 60 mg of coenzyme Q10 Compl. ¶43 The complaint includes an image of the "Supplement Facts" label from the product's packaging Compl. p. 10
• The product is marketed for benefits including "healthy aging and mitochondrial function," "cellular health," and support for "mitophagy-the recycling of damaged mitochondria" Compl. ¶38 Compl. ¶39 The complaint provides a screenshot from Walgreens.com showing these marketing claims Compl. p. 8
• The complaint alleges the product is sold nationwide through multiple e-commerce and brick-and-mortar channels, including Defendant's website, Amazon.com, and Walgreens Compl. ¶¶35-37

IV. Analysis of Infringement Allegations

10,485,782 Patent Infringement Allegations

• Identified Points of Contention:
  • Evidentiary Question: A primary point of contention may be whether the administration of the accused product actually results in "increasing or maintaining mitochondrial function." The complaint relies on Defendant's marketing statements to allege this outcome, which may raise questions of whether these statements are sufficient proof of the method's actual performance.
  • Scope Questions: The term "effective amount" is not numerically defined in the independent claims of the '782 patent. The parties may dispute what quantity of urolithin constitutes an "effective amount" for increasing or maintaining mitochondrial function.

11,020,373 Patent Infringement Allegations

• Identified Points of Contention:
  • Evidentiary Question: Similar to the '782 patent, a key question will be whether consumers of the accused product actually experience an increase in autophagy. The complaint cites marketing claims of supporting "mitophagy," raising the issue of whether this is sufficient to allege the claimed method step is performed. The complaint includes a screenshot from Defendant's Q&A section confirming the CoQ10 is in the "ubiquinone" form, which is directly relevant to the infringement theory for the '358 patent Compl. p. 18
  • Scope Questions: The definition of a "healthy human" could be a point of contention. The parties may dispute the scope of this term and how it applies to the actual consumer base for a "healthy aging" supplement.

V. Key Claim Terms for Construction

• The Term: "effective amount" (from Claim 1 of the '782 Patent)

• Context and Importance: This term is central to the infringement analysis, as it defines the required dosage. Unlike in the '373 patent, this term is not defined by a specific milligram range in the independent claims of the '782 patent. Its construction will determine the evidence required to prove that the 500 mg dose of the accused product is "effective."

• Intrinsic Evidence for Interpretation:

  • Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: The specification provides broad exemplary dosage ranges, such as "0.1-150 milligram (mg) of urolithin per kilogram (kg) body weight" '782 Patent, col. 9:1-4, which may support a view that a wide range of doses could be considered effective.
  • Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: The specification also links an "effective amount" to achieving a specific outcome, such as a "peak serum level of at least 0.001 micromolar" '782 Patent, col. 9:12-14 A defendant may argue that the term requires proof that a particular biological threshold is met, not just that a certain quantity was administered.

• The Term: "increasing or maintaining mitochondrial function" (from Claim 1 of the '782 Patent)

• Context and Importance: This functional language defines the result of the claimed method. The entire infringement allegation for the '782 patent hinges on whether taking the accused product achieves this outcome. Practitioners may focus on this term because it presents a high evidentiary hurdle for the plaintiff.

• Intrinsic Evidence for Interpretation:

  • Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: The patent lists numerous indicia of mitochondrial function, including "mitochondrial activity," "energy of the subject," "mitochondrial biogenesis," and "ATP levels" '782 Patent, claims 23, 25, 26, 28 This suggests the term could be satisfied by demonstrating an increase in any one of these various metrics.
  • Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: A defendant could argue that "increasing or maintaining" requires a scientifically rigorous, statistically significant change relative to a baseline or control, a standard that may be difficult to prove in the context of over-the-counter supplement use by the general public.

VI. Other Allegations

• Indirect Infringement: The complaint alleges induced infringement, stating that Defendant's labeling, marketing, and promotional materials instruct and encourage customers to use the product in an infringing manner-specifically, to take an effective amount of urolithin A to increase mitochondrial function and autophagy Compl. ¶52 Compl. ¶58 Compl. ¶68 Compl. ¶79 The complaint also pleads contributory infringement, alleging the product is especially adapted for use in an infringing manner and is not a staple article of commerce Compl. ¶53 Compl. ¶59 Compl. ¶69 Compl. ¶80
• Willful Infringement: Willfulness allegations are based on alleged pre-suit knowledge. The complaint states that Plaintiff sent a notice letter to Defendant on March 8, 2023, identifying the '782 and '373 patents Compl. ¶83 It further alleges Defendant was aware of its infringement "at least as early as March 21, 2023" Compl. ¶85 The complaint alleges that after this correspondence, Defendant made "certain changes to its urolithin A product advertising but has refused to remove its infringing products from the market" Compl. ¶87

VII. Analyst's Conclusion: Key Questions for the Case

• A core issue will be one of evidentiary sufficiency: Can Plaintiff's allegations, which are substantially based on Defendant's marketing claims (e.g., "support mitochondrial function," "support mitophagy"), serve as a sufficient factual basis to plausibly allege that consumers of the accused supplement actually perform the methods and achieve the functional results required by the patent claims?
• A second key question will be one of claim construction: How will the court construe the term "effective amount" in the '782 patent, which lacks a specific numerical range? The resolution of this issue will determine the type and quantum of evidence Plaintiff must present to demonstrate that the 500 mg dose in the accused product meets this limitation.
• A third central question will concern willfulness: Given the complaint's detailed allegations of pre-suit notice and subsequent correspondence, a key factual dispute for trial will likely be whether Defendant's conduct after being notified of the patents was objectively reckless, especially in light of allegations that it altered its marketing but continued to sell the product.