Can Food Really Be Medicine? Transforming Health Care One Bite at a Time – Diagnosing Health Care Video Podcast
Federal Court Strikes Down FDA Rule on LDTs - Thought Leaders in Health Law®
Podcast - Hot Topics in FDA Regulation: GLP-1s, LDTs, AI and More
Prescribing GLP-1 Medications: Be Aware of Legal Limitations
AGG Talks: Cross-Border Business Podcast - Episode 22: What Global Companies Need to Know About Navigating FDA Regulations and U.S. Market Entry
AI and Pharmacovigilance Under the FDA's New Emerging Drug Safety Technology Program – The Good Bot Podcast
GLP-1 Drugs and Cultivated Meat: What’s the Impact on the Food and Agriculture Industry?
Taking the Pulse, A Health Care and Life Sciences Video Podcast | Episode 202: Life Sciences Startups and Industry Developments with Gil Price, Life Sciences Leader
The Future of Laboratory Testing Just Got a Little Clearer: FDA's Final Rule on LDTs – Diagnosing Health Care
Video: Food for Thought and Thoughts on Food: Innovating USDA Science with Sanah Baig, Deputy Under Secretary for Research, Education, and Economics
The FDA's Response to AI Medical Innovation — The Good Bot Podcast
FDA Releases Laboratory-Developed Tests Final Rule – Thought Leaders in Health Law
Litigating Nutrition: Class Action Battles Over Dietary Supplements – Speaking of Litigation Video Podcast
Changes in FDA, Cannabis Policies and AI Developments
Ad Law Tool Kit Show – Episode 2 – Marketing FDA-Regulated Products
Medical Device Legal News with Sam Bernstein: Episode 18
Medical Device Legal News with Sam Bernstein: Episode 17
A Look Into the FDA and USDA Regulatory Regimes
Taking the Pulse, A Health Care and Life Sciences Video Podcast | Episode 167: Dr. Ehsan Samei & Dr. Susan Halabi, Triangle CERSI
The Federal Circuit recently considered the scope of a permanent injunction that prohibited a drug manufacturer from conducting certain clinical and regulatory activities in Jazz Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. Avadel CNS...more
Analyzing the permissible scope of an injunction under the Hatch-Waxman Act, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit reversed the district court’s prohibitions on an open-label extension (OLE) of a then-running...more
The District of Delaware recently denied a motion to dismiss a patent infringement complaint involving gene editing technology that sought relief under the Safe Harbor Provision of the Hatch-Waxman Act. Specifically, the...more
In BlueAllele Corp. v. Intellia Therapeutics, Inc., 2024 U.S. Dist. Lexis 222094 (D. Del. Dec. 9, 2024)1, the District of Delaware addressed several issues relevant to the safe harbor defense in Hatch-Waxman litigation. ...more
We have been monitoring the dispute between Edwards Lifesciences Corp. (“Edwards”) and Meril Life Sciences Pvt., Ltd. (“Meril”) before and after the initial Federal Circuit decision. The dispute focused on whether Meril’s...more
In 2019, Edwards Lifesciences Corporation sued Meril Life Sciences Pvt. Ltd. for patent infringement in the Northern District of California, with Fenwick representing Meril in the district court case and the recent appellate...more
The Federal Circuit’s decision in Edwards Lifesciences Corp. v. Meril Life Sciences Pvt. Ltd., has garnered significant attention, especially concerning the application of the “safe harbor” provision under 35 U.S.C. §...more
The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) released a Notice on the Federal Register (“the Notice”) today requesting public commentary and input on the current state of the experimental use exception. The USPTO is...more
A split Federal Circuit panel recently held that the safe harbor provision of 35 U.S.C. §271(e)(1) providing a defense to infringement applies if the allegedly infringing activity is “reasonably related to submitting...more
The Federal Circuit considered the relevance of an alleged infringer’s intent in a safe harbor analysis in Edwards Lifesciences Corp. v. Meril Life Scis. Pvt. The District Court had previously granted summary judgment that...more
The safe harbor exception in 35 U.S.C. § 271(e)(1) applies “solely for uses reasonably related to the development and submission of information” to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). The Federal Circuit interpreted the...more
The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed that the 35 U.S.C. § 271(e)(1) safe harbor protecting certain infringing acts undertaken for regulatory approval applied to an alleged infringer’s importation of...more
On January 5, 2024, in litigation between REGENXBIO and Sarepta Therapeutics, Judge Richard Andrews of the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware District Court granted summary judgment for Sarepta and ruled that...more
Gain a comprehensive understanding of Hatch-Waxman and BPCIA essentials, a critical competency for legal and business professionals in the biopharmaceutical arena. Attend ACI’s Hatch-Waxman and BPCIA Proficiency Series...more
Congress’s protection from patent infringement for drug developers created under the Hatch-Waxman Act of 1984 (Act) has been extensively litigated over the past three+ decades, but the scope of the so-called “safe harbor...more
We increasingly encounter research and development collaboration partners relying on various research tools, cell lines, and other technologies to develop products and therapies within the cell, tissue, and gene therapy...more
Are patented products that are not themselves subject to FDA approval, but used to develop products that are subject to FDA approval, protected under the Hatch-Waxman safe harbor? While courts have reached different...more
On January 4, 2022, Judge Andrews from the United States District Court for the District of Delaware denied Sarepta Therapeutics, Inc.’s (“Sarepta”) Rule 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss a complaint for infringement of U.S. Patent...more
It has been nearly 10 years since the U.S. Biosimilars Pathway (the Biologics Price Competition and Innovation Act) was enacted. The first biosimilar product in U.S. history was approved and launched in 2015. Ten biosimilars...more
AMGEN INC. v. HOSPIRA, INC. Before Moore, Bryson, and Chen. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Delaware. Summary: Biological engineering activity that would otherwise constitute patent...more
A recent case at the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware demonstrates how nuanced safe harbor protection under 35 U.S.C. § 271(e)(1) "non-infringement" can be for a pharmaceutical company developing a biosimilar...more
This somewhat arcane question took on significant, real-world consequences when Judge Andrews of the Delaware District Court denied Hospira’s JMOL to overturn a jury’s $70 million award to Amgen for Hospira’s manufacture and...more
The safe harbor defense has been of issue in two recent cases in which the bounds of the protection has been analyzed. Section 271(e)(1) carves out an exception to patent infringement liability when otherwise-infringing...more
Here are our picks for the top-five most significant legal developments regarding biosimilars in 2017...more
In one of the first Biologics Price Competition and Innovation Act (BPCIA) litigations to reach trial, a jury on Friday awarded Amgen $70 million in damages for Pfizer’s infringement of one of Amgen’s expired patents...more