News & Analysis as of

Declaratory Judgments Food and Drug Administration (FDA)

Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox P.L.L.C.

MarkIt to Market® - January 2023

Thank you for reading the January 2023 issue of Sterne Kessler's MarkIt to Market® newsletter. This month, we discuss an ongoing trademark dispute between the band OK Go and cereal company Post, how to stay vigilant about...more

Fenwick & West LLP

Valeant v. Mylan: Restrictions on Venue in Hatch-Waxman Litigation

Fenwick & West LLP on

For the first time since the U.S. Supreme Court’s TC Heartland decision, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit addressed the issue of venue specific to Hatch-Waxman litigation, pursuant to which branded...more

Kramer Levin Naftalis & Frankel LLP

CAR T-Cell Therapy Takes Off and Brings on Patent Litigation

CAR T-Cell therapy, a new biologic therapy, is taking off. As companies continue to develop this new and promising therapy, patent litigation inevitably follows.  ...more

Robins Kaplan LLP

Valeant Pharms. N. Am. LLC v. Zydus Pharms. (USA) Inc.

Robins Kaplan LLP on

BECAUSE PLAINTIFFS FAILED TO SHOW SPECIFICALLY HOW DEFENDANTS COMMITTED ANY ACT OF INFRINGEMENT IN NEW JERSEY—PARTICULARLY BY FILING AN ANDA IN WEST VIRGINIA WITH THE FDA IN MARYLAND—OR THAT ANY FUTURE, INTENDED ACTS WERE A...more

Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox P.L.L.C.

The Patent Dance Is Optional

In Sandoz Inc. v. Amgen Inc., the Supreme Court brought greater certainty to two key issues relating to the “patent dance” under the Biologics Price Competition and Innovation Act (BPCIA). First, the Court held that where a...more

Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP

Supreme Court Decides Sandoz, Inc. v. Amgen, Inc.

On June 12, 2017, the Supreme Court decided Sandoz, Inc. v. Amgen, Inc., Nos. 15-1039, 15-1195, in which it held that (a) a manufacturer of a licensed biological product cannot obtain federal injunctive relief to enforce 42...more

Jones Day

Supreme Court Hears Oral Arguments in Sandoz Inc. v. Amgen

Jones Day on

On April 26, 2017, the U.S. Supreme Court heard oral argument in Sandoz Inc. v. Amgen Inc. (Nos. 15-1039, 15-1195), on appeal from the Federal Circuit's July 21, 2015, opinion interpreting various provisions of the Biologics...more

Knobbe Martens

Supreme Court Grants Certiorari in Amgen v. Sandoz

Knobbe Martens on

On January 13, 2017, the Supreme Court granted certiorari in Amgen v. Sandoz, 794. F.3d 1347 (Fed. Cir. 2015) and Sandoz v. Amgen, 773 F.3d 1274 (Fed. Cir. 2014), appealed from the Federal Circuit. The petitions involve the...more

Goodwin

BPCIA Litigation Roundup (Fall 2016)

Goodwin on

Below is our Fall 2016 update on the U.S. patent litigations concerning proposed or approved biosimilar products. For additional details, please consult our BPCIA Litigation Summary Chart or our previous quarterly update...more

Womble Bond Dickinson

Basics of the BPCIA

Womble Bond Dickinson on

The FDA broadly defines biologics as medical products derived from living sources (human, animal, plant, or microorganism) intended to treat or prevent diseases. Biologics thus include such varied vehicles of medical...more

Fenwick & West LLP

No Exception to Statutory Requirement that a Biosimilar Applicant Provide Notice of Intent to Market its Product

Fenwick & West LLP on

Last week in Amgen Inc. v. Apotex Inc., No. 2016-1308 (Fed. Cir. July 5, 2016), a unanimous Federal Circuit panel ruled that under the Biologics Price Competition and Innovation Act of 2009 (“BPCIA”), a biosimilar applicant...more

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP

MBHB Snippets: A review of developments in Intellectual Property Law - Volume 14, Issue 2 (Spring 2016)

Pre-AIA and Post-AIA Issues Presented by the On-Sale Bar - The “on-sale” bar to patentability refers to a sale or offer for sale of an invention that can invalidate the patent for that invention. The...more

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP

Standing Alone – The Current Status of the BPCIA’s Notice of Commercial Marketing

In March 2015, the FDA approved the first biosimilar application, which was for a follow-on biologic drug of Amgen’s reference product NEUPOGEN® (filgrastim). Yet, before the applicant, Sandoz, could launch its biosimilar...more

Patterson Belknap Webb & Tyler LLP

Nearly Two Years After Dismissal of its Declaratory Judgment Action, FDA Accepts for Review Sandoz’s Application for a Biosimilar...

Sandoz Inc. announced on October 2, 2015 that FDA accepted its regulatory application for a proposed biosimilar of Amgen Inc.’s biologic arthritis drug Enbrel for review. The acceptance comes years after Sandoz attempted to...more

Patterson Belknap Webb & Tyler LLP

Apotex Follows the Pre-Suit Information Exchange Provisions of the BPCIA

In the first skirmishes between biosimilar makers and innovator companies, biosimilar makers attempted to bypass the litigation provisions of the Biologics Price Competition and Innovation Act of 2009 (BPCIA) through the...more

Patterson Belknap Webb & Tyler LLP

First Federal Register Notice of BPCIA Suit

Yesterday, FDA published notice of Janssen’s lawsuit against Celltrion and Hospira on March 6, 2015 under the Biologics Price Competition and Innovation Act of 2009 (BPCIA) in the Federal Register. Although Janssen’s lawsuit...more

Polsinelli

Federal Circuit Delays Sandoz Biosimilar Launch

Polsinelli on

In a closely-watched case between Amgen and Sandoz regarding the first biosimilar approved (Zarxio), the Federal Circuit interpreted key Biologics Price Competition and Innovation Act (BPCIA) provisions regarding Sandoz's...more

McDermott Will & Emery

Declaratory Judgment of Non-Infringement of a Disclaimed Patent Warranted in Hatch-Waxman - Apotex Inc. v. Daiichi Sankyo, Inc.

Addressing the issue of subject matter jurisdiction in Hatch-Waxman litigation, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit reversed a district court’s dismissal for lack of case or controversy of an action seeking...more

Robins Kaplan LLP

Sandoz Inc. v. Amgen Inc.,

Robins Kaplan LLP on

Case Name: Sandoz Inc. v. Amgen Inc., No. 2014-1693, 2014 U.S. App. LEXIS 22903 (Fed. Cir. Dec. 5, 2014) (Circuit Judges Dyk, Taranto, and Chen presiding; Opinion by Taranto, J.) (appeal from N.D. Cal, Chesney, J.) (A...more

Proskauer - New England IP Blog

Biosimilars Update

Novartis came one step closer to becoming the first company to offer a biosimilar drug for sale in the United States. Last month, an independent panel voted 14-0 to recommend FDA approval of Sandoz’s (Novartis’ generics...more

Robins Kaplan LLP

The BPCIA’s framework for patent dispute resolution counsels against the exercise of declaratory judgment jurisdiction

Robins Kaplan LLP on

Celltrion Healthcare Co., Ltd. et al. v. Kennedy Trust for Rheumatology Research; Hospira, Inc. v. Janssen Biotech, Inc. et al. Case Number: 1:14-cv-02256; 1:14-cv-07049 On the same day, Judge Crotty granted two...more

Foley Hoag LLP

Federal Circuit’s Sandoz v. Amgen Decision Forecloses Early Declaratory Judgment Suits by Biosimilars Applicants

Foley Hoag LLP on

On December 5, in the closely watched Sandoz v. Amgen case, the Federal Circuit held that a biosimilars applicant cannot use the Declaratory Judgment Act to challenge a reference product sponsor's patent prior to filing a...more

Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP

Sandoz and Celltrion Decline the Invitation to Dance: Biosimilars Challenge the Applicability of the BPCIA’s Exchange Provisions...

In our blog post of November 18, 2013 (“No Avoiding BPCIA For Biosimilars: No Patent Declaratory Judgment Before Biosimilars Application is Filed”), we discussed the decision of the U.S. District Court for the Northern...more

23 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 1

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
- hide
- hide