Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Law Commons

Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Intellectual Property Law

University of Michigan Law School

Hatch-Waxman Act

Articles 1 - 9 of 9

Full-Text Articles in Law

An Administrative Meter Maid: Using Inter Partes Review And Post-Grant Review To Curb Exclusivity Parking Via The "Failure To Market" Provision Of The Hatch-Waxman Act, Brian T. Apel Oct 2015

An Administrative Meter Maid: Using Inter Partes Review And Post-Grant Review To Curb Exclusivity Parking Via The "Failure To Market" Provision Of The Hatch-Waxman Act, Brian T. Apel

Michigan Law Review

Congress created the unique Hatch-Waxman framework in 1984 to increase the availability of low-cost generic drugs while preserving patent incentives for new drug development. The Hatch-Waxman Act rewards generic drug companies that successfully challenge a pharmaceutical patent: 180 days of market exclusivity before any other generic firm can enter the market. When a generic firm obtains this reward, sometimes drug developers agree to pay generic firms to delay entering the market. These pay-for-delay agreements give rise to exclusivity parking and run counter to congressional intent by delaying full generic drug competition. The Medicare Prescription Drug, Improvement, and Modernization Act created …


Patent Punting: How Fda And Antitrust Courts Undermine The Hatch-Waxman Act To Avoid Dealing With Patents, Rebecca S. Eisenberg, Daniel A. Crane Jan 2015

Patent Punting: How Fda And Antitrust Courts Undermine The Hatch-Waxman Act To Avoid Dealing With Patents, Rebecca S. Eisenberg, Daniel A. Crane

Michigan Telecommunications & Technology Law Review

Under the Hatch-Waxman Act, patent law and FDA regulation work together to determine the timing of generic entry in the market for drugs. But FDA has sought to avoid any responsibility for reading patents, insisting that its role in administering the patent provisions of the Hatch-Waxman Act is purely ministerial. This gap in regulatory oversight has allowed innovators to use irrelevant patents to defer generic competition. Meanwhile, patent litigation has set the stage for anticompetitive settlements rather than adjudication of the patent issues in the courts. As these settlements have provoked antitrust litigation, antitrust courts have proven no more willing …


Teva V. Eisai: What's The Real Controversy, Grace Wang Jan 2011

Teva V. Eisai: What's The Real Controversy, Grace Wang

Michigan Telecommunications & Technology Law Review

This Note examines the changing role of declaratory judgment actions in challenging patents upon generic entry and evaluates alternative regulatory schemes to the FDA's current system of patent enforcement in the drug approval setting. Part I reviews the Federal Circuit's recent decisions regarding generic drug entry, focusing on how the courts justify declaratory judgments in the current system and when a "controversy" exists to create Article III jurisdiction. Part II examines the complex system of regulating generic drug entry and how attempts to stop the exploitation of loopholes have resulted in a patchwork of regulation by various parties. It challenges …


Hatch-Waxmanizing Copyright, Michal Shur-Ofry Jan 2011

Hatch-Waxmanizing Copyright, Michal Shur-Ofry

Michigan Telecommunications & Technology Law Review

This Essay presents a novel proposal for counter balancing "copyright overspills." In the background of the discussion is the common reality of users succumbing to rights holders' attempts to license uses which are most likely fair uses or completely free of copyright protection. These practices have attracted considerable attention in recent literature. Most scholarly proposals in this context emphasize the need to clarify the contours of the fair use doctrine and to remove doctrinal ambiguities. Yet these initiatives are probably insufficient to overcome users' risk aversion in copyright markets due to an inherent structural imbalance within copyright law. While the …


Pharmaceutical Patent Litigation Settlements: Balancing Patent & Antitrust Policy Through Institutional Choice, Timothy A. Cook Jan 2011

Pharmaceutical Patent Litigation Settlements: Balancing Patent & Antitrust Policy Through Institutional Choice, Timothy A. Cook

Michigan Telecommunications & Technology Law Review

Should a branded pharmaceutical company be allowed to pay a generic competitor to stay out of the market for a drug? Antitrust policy implies that such a deal should be prohibited, but the answer becomes less clear when the transaction is packaged as a patent-litigation settlement. Since Congress passed the Hatch-Waxman Act, which encourages generic manufacturers to challenge pharmaceutical patent validity, settlements of this kind have been on the rise. Congress, the Department of Justice, and the Federal Trade Commission have condemned these agreements as anticompetitive and costly to American consumers, but none of these bodies has been able to …


How Many Patents Does It Take To Make A Drug - Follow-On Pharmaceutical Patents And University Licensing, Lisa Larrimore Ouellette Jan 2010

How Many Patents Does It Take To Make A Drug - Follow-On Pharmaceutical Patents And University Licensing, Lisa Larrimore Ouellette

Michigan Telecommunications & Technology Law Review

As described by Professors Dan Burk and Mark Lemley, drugs are[...] special because of the low number of patents per product: "In some industries, such as chemistry and pharmaceuticals, a single patent normally covers a single product. Much conventional wisdom in the patent system is built on the unstated assumption of such a one-to-one correspondence." Although many have repeated this one-patent, one-drug assumption, there has been little empirical analysis of how many patents actually protect each drug. In fact, most small-molecule drugs are protected by multiple patents. The average was nearly 3.5 patents per drug in 2005, with over five …


It Is Time: Why The Fda Should Start Disclosing Drug Trial Data, Mustafa Ünlü Jan 2010

It Is Time: Why The Fda Should Start Disclosing Drug Trial Data, Mustafa Ünlü

Michigan Telecommunications & Technology Law Review

Although [drug] manufacturers bear the cost of research data generation, it is oftentimes a worthwhile investment that also confers significant commercial advantages. Consequently, they have argued that research data should be considered a trade secret and kept confidential. The FDA's longstanding position has been to accept this proposition. Even when Congress appeared to mandate disclosure or weaken the underlying rationale for secrecy, the FDA has continued to treat research data as confidential. A strong argument against a default posture of confidentiality is that research data disclosure would promote broad public interests by eliminating the societal costs brought about by keeping …


Unsettling Drug Patent Settlements: A Framework For Presumptive Illegality, Michael A. Carrier Oct 2009

Unsettling Drug Patent Settlements: A Framework For Presumptive Illegality, Michael A. Carrier

Michigan Law Review

A tidal wave of high drug prices has recently crashed across the U.S. economy. One of the primary culprits has been the increase in agreements by which brand-name drug manufacturers and generic firms have settled patent litigation. The framework for such agreements has been the Hatch-Waxman Act, which Congress enacted in 1984. One of the Act's goals was to provide incentives for generics to challenge brand-name patents. But brand firms have recently paid generics millions of dollars to drop their lawsuits and refrain from entering the market. These reverse-payment settlements threaten significant harm. Courts nonetheless have recently blessed them, explaining …


The Experimental Purpose Doctrine And Biomedical Research, Tao Huang Oct 2004

The Experimental Purpose Doctrine And Biomedical Research, Tao Huang

Michigan Telecommunications & Technology Law Review

The experimental use doctrine is a common law rule in patent law that until a few years ago excused accused infringers who made and used patented products or processes on the basis of an experimental, educational, or nonprofit purpose when there was de minimis economic injury to the patent owner and de minimis economic gain to the infringer. While the application of the experimental purpose doctrine was always narrow, two recent Federal Circuit decisions indicate that there is not much left under its aegis. In Madey v. Duke University, the Federal Circuit strictly limited the application of the experimental purpose …