Law Commons^™

Encouraging Public Access To Pharmaceuticals Through Modified Protection Of Clinical Trial Data, Scott M. Nolan Ii

IP Theory

Part I of this Article investigates the development of pharmaceuticals and clinical trial data with a focus on patent and data protection. Part II evaluates the effects of protection and the challenges it poses to widespread public pharmaceutical access. Part III discusses two scholarly approaches to the public access issue that focus on clinical data protection and their associated challenges. In light of these scholarly works, Part IV suggests a new approach to clinical trial data protection that aims to improve public pharmaceutical access while maintaining the incentives to invent for drug developers.

Is The Chemical Genus Claim Really “Dead” At The Federal Circuit?: Part Ii, Christopher M. Holman

Faculty Works

A 2020 law review article entitled The Death of the Genus Claim (“Death”) purports to document a dramatic shift in the Federal Circuit’s interpretation of 35 U.S.C. 112(a)’s enablement and written description requirements, particularly as applied to chemical genus claims. According to the authors of Death, it has become nearly impossible to obtain a chemical genus claim that will be upheld as valid in the face of a challenge for overbreadth under Section 112(a). Death was cited extensively in Amgens’s successful petition for certiorari in Amgen v. Sanofi, a case asking the Supreme Court to overturn the Federal Circuit’s decision …

Beefing Up Skinny Labels: Induced Infringement As A Question Of Law, Garrett T. Potter

Notre Dame Law Review

This Note proposes a novel argument for improving the application of induced infringement by splitting its elements into separate questions of fact and law, incorporating the relevant perception and reasoning of both judge and jury. Part I provides a primer of the Hatch-Waxman Act and interactions (and lack thereof) between the USPTO and FDA in regulating pharmaceutical compositions. Part II assesses the historical landscape that led to the codification of induced infringement. Part III concludes by proposing an alternate approach by treating an element of induced infringement as a question of law, rather than a question of fact, and sets …

Eviscerating Patent Scope, Shahrokh Falati

Articles & Chapters

The scope of patent claims directed to inventions in the field of pharmaceuticals and biotechnology has been stumped by the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit’s recent jurisprudence on 35 U.S.C. § 112. Specifically, the application of a heightened test for enablement of claims to a genus of compounds with functional limitations or a genus of therapeutic antibodies, coupled with an increasingly broader application of the written description doctrine, has resulted in considerable uncertainty in the biopharmaceutical industry. The Federal Circuit’s shift in interpreting 35 U.S.C. § 112 contravenes the statute and Supreme Court precedent by splitting the singular …

The Intellectual Property Of Vaccines: Takeaways From Recent Infectious Disease Outbreaks, Ana Santos Rutschman

Michigan Law Review Online

In late 2019 and early 2020, a new strain of coronavirus, a family of pathogens causing serious respiratory illness, began infecting populations across the globe. A quick uptick in COVID-19, the disease caused by the novel pathogen, prompted the World Health Organization to declare the outbreak a Public Health Emergency of International Concern on January 30, 2020. By mid-February 2020, with 26 countries reporting cases of COVID-19 infection, the global case count had surpassed 50,000, and had resulted in over 1,500 deaths. The World Health Organization elevated the status of the outbreak to a pandemic in mid-March. As of early …

The Cost Of Novelty, Will Nicholson Price Ii

Articles

Patent law tries to spur the development of new and better innova­tive technology. But it focuses much more on “new” than “better”—and it turns out that “new” carries real social costs. I argue that patent law promotes innovation that diverges from existing technology, either a little (what I call “differentiating innovation”) or a lot (“exploring innova­tion”), at the expense of innovation that tells us more about existing technology (“deepening innovation”). Patent law’s focus on newness is unsurprising, and fits within a well-told narrative of innovative diversity accompanied by market selection of the best technologies. Unfortunately, innovative diversity brings not only …

A Mathematical Solution To The Sine Of Madness That Is Pharmaceutical Compulsory Licensing Under The Trips Agreement And The Doha Declaration, Ashley E. Sperbeck

Marquette Intellectual Property Law Review

A viable economic solution is necessary to address the shortcomings, textual ambiguities, and deficiencies engulfing international patent protection, leading to the inability of LDCs facing public health crises or national emergencies and lacking pharmaceutical manufacturing facilities to obtain generic pharmaceuticals. This Note poses a solution to this problem via another Amendment to the TRIPS Agreement and the Doha Declaration, which provides a mathematical framework to determine when and under what circumstances a compulsory license should be granted. Furthermore, this Note contemplates establishment of a WTO subcommittee to oversee this proposed solution and to ensure compliance with this Amendment. This concrete …

Tribal Sovereign Immunity As A Defense At The Patent Trial And Appeal Board? Or A Violation Of U.S. Antitrust Laws?, Samantha Roth

Marquette Intellectual Property Law Review

This Comment will address two primary issues. First, it will analyze the basis of sovereign immunity rights of tribes, with a focus on the relationship between intellectual property rights and sovereignty. Second, it will discuss whether this arrangement violates the antitrust laws of the United States. This Comment concludes that even if a claim of tribal sovereign immunity is legitimate, it is likely that such an arrangement still violates the relevant antitrust claims.

Computational Experimentation, Tabrez Y. Ebrahim

Faculty Scholarship

Experimentation conjures images of laboratories and equipment in biotechnology, chemistry, materials science, and pharmaceuticals. Yet modern day experimentation is not limited to only chemical synthesis, but is increasingly computational. Researchers in the unpredictable arts can experiment upon the functions, properties, reactions, and structures of chemical compounds with highly accurate computational techniques. These computational capabilities challenge the enablement and utility patentability requirements. The patent statute requires that the inventor explain how to make and use the invention without undue experimentation and that the invention have at least substantial and specific utility. These patentability requirements do not align with computational research capabilities, …

Update On Antitrust And Pay-For-Delay: Evaluating “No Authorized Generic” And “Exclusive License” Provisions In Hatch-Waxman Settlements, Saami Zain

San Diego Law Review

In Federal Trade Commission v. Actavis, the United States Supreme Court held that a patent litigation settlement where a branded drug company pays a generic drug company to end the litigation and delay launching its generic may violate the antitrust laws. Although the decision ended years of controversy over whether such settlements were subject to antitrust scrutiny, many issues remain unresolved concerning the lawfulness of these settlements. In particular, courts have struggled in assessing the legality of patent settlements between branded and generic drug manufacturers involving non-cash compensation or benefits. This article discusses one type of non-cash compensation that is …

Intellectual Property And Public Health – A White Paper, Ryan G. Vacca, Jim Chen, Jay Dratler Jr., Tom Folsom, Timothy Hall, Yaniv Heled, Frank Pasquale, Elizabeth Reilly, Jeff Samuels, Kathy Strandburg, Kara Swanson, Andrew Torrance, Katharine Van Tassel

Katharine Van Tassel

On October 26, 2012, the University of Akron School of Law’s Center for Intellectual Property and Technology hosted its Sixth Annual IP Scholars Forum. In attendance were thirteen legal scholars with expertise and an interest in IP and public health who met to discuss problems and potential solutions at the intersection of these fields. This report summarizes this discussion by describing the problems raised, areas of agreement and disagreement between the participants, suggestions and solutions made by participants and the subsequent evaluations of these suggestions and solutions.

Led by the moderator, participants at the Forum focused generally on three broad …

The Uneasy Case For Patent Law, Rachel E. Sachs

Michigan Law Review

A central tenet of patent law scholarship holds that if any scientific field truly needs patents to stimulate progress, it is pharmaceuticals. Patents are thought to be critical in encouraging pharmaceutical companies to develop and commercialize new therapies, due to the high costs of researching diseases, developing treatments, and bringing drugs through the complex, expensive approval process. Scholars and policymakers often point to patent law’s apparent success in the pharmaceutical industry to justify broader calls for more expansive patent rights.

This Article challenges this conventional wisdom about the centrality of patents to drug development by presenting a case study of …

Cancer's Ip, Jacob S. Sherkow

Articles & Chapters

The state of publicly funded science is in peril. Instead, new biomedical research efforts — in particular, the recent funding of a “Cancer Moonshot” — have focused on employing public-private partnerships, joint ventures between private industry and public agencies, as being more politically palatable. Yet, public-private partnerships like the Cancer Moonshot center on the production of public goods: scientific information. Using private incentives in this context presents numerous puzzles for both intellectual property law and information policy. This Article examines whether—and to what extent — intellectual property and information policy can be appropriately tailored to the goals of public-private partnerships. …

The Actavis Inference: Theory And Practice, Aaron S. Edlin, C. Scott Hemphill, Herbert J. Hovenkamp, Carl Shapiro

Aaron Edlin

In FTC v. Actavis, Inc., the Supreme Court considered "reverse payment" settlements of patent infringement litigation. In such a settlement, a patentee pays the alleged infringer to settle, and the alleged infringer agrees not to enter the market for a period of time. The Court held that a reverse payment settlement violates antitrust law if the patentee is paying to avoid competition. The core insight of Actavis is the Actavis Inference: a large and otherwise unexplained payment, combined with delayed entry, supports a reasonable inference of harm to consumers from lessened competition.This paper is an effort to assist courts and …

Activating Actavis, Aaron Edlin, C. Scott Hemphill, Herbert J. Hovenkamp, Carl Shapiro

Aaron Edlin

In Federal Trade Commission v. Actavis, Inc., the Supreme Court provided fundamental guidance about how courts should handle antitrust challenges to reverse payment patent settlements. The Court came down strongly in favor of an antitrust solution to the problem, concluding that “an antitrust action is likely to prove more feasible administratively than the Eleventh Circuit believed.” At the same time, Justice Breyer’s majority opinion acknowledged that the Court did not answer every relevant question. The opinion closed by “leav[ing] to the lower courts the structuring of the present rule-of-reason antitrust litigation.”This article is an effort to help courts and counsel …

Actavis And Error Costs: A Reply To Critics, Aaron S. Edlin, C. Scott Hemphill, Herbert J. Hovenkamp, Carl Shapiro

Aaron Edlin

The Supreme Court’s opinion in Federal Trade Commission v. Actavis, Inc. provided fundamental guidance about how courts should handle antitrust challenges to reverse payment patent settlements. In our previous article, Activating Actavis, we identified and operationalized the essential features of the Court’s analysis. Our analysis has been challenged by four economists, who argue that our approach might condemn procompetitive settlements.As we explain in this reply, such settlements are feasible, however, only under special circumstances. Moreover, even where feasible, the parties would not actually choose such a settlement in equilibrium. These considerations, and others discussed in the reply, serve to confirm …

Much Ado About The Tpp's Effect On Pharmaceuticals, Emily M. Morris

Faculty Publications

The Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement’s many provisions that were beneficial to the pharmaceutical industry have caused a good deal of controversy. Specifically, critics allege that the TPP’s provisions requiring that member states expand patentable subject matter, adjust pharmaceutical patent terms, and link regulatory marketing approval to a drug's patent status would have raised drug prices and hindered access to medicines, particularly in developing countries. Closer examination of these provisions as well as the various ways in which member states can modify or ameliorate the effects of these provisions suggests that their potential effect on drug prices and access to health care …

Patent Pacifism, Clark D. Asay

Faculty Scholarship

Over the last decade, much of the patent law literature has focused on the problem of “patent trolls,” or patent owners who don’t make products, but sue others that do. The basic complaint against these types of entities is that they impose a tax on innovation without providing offsetting societal benefits. Furthermore, their patent assertions have been on the rise, with a significant percentage of patent suits now attributable to them. In short, the troll phenomenon suggests a problem of excessive patent assertions.

But despite the importance of the troll phenomenon, the fact remains that most patents are never asserted, …

Correlative Obligation In Patent Law: The Role Of Public Good In Defining The Limits Of Patent Exclusivity, Srividhya Ragavan

Srividhya Ragavan

In light of the recent outrageous price-spiking of pharmaceuticals, this Article questions the underlying justifications for exclusive rights conferred by the grant of a patent. Traditionally, patents are defined as property rights granted to encourage desirable innovation. This definition is a misfit as treating patents as property rights does a poor job of defining the limits of the patent rights as well as the public benefit goals of the system. This misfit gradually caused an imbalance in the rights versus duties construct within patent law. After a thorough analysis of the historical and philosophical perspectives of patent exclusivity, this Article …

How Do The Social Benefits And Costs Of The Patent System Stack Up In Pharmaceuticals?, Daniel J. Gifford

Journal of Intellectual Property Law

This paper explores the workings of the patent system in the context of the generation of new pharmaceutical products. First it identifies the relevant characteristics of the patent system and its relation to the market. The paper concedes that, in general, the patent system is probably the best way of generating new technology, in substantial part because that system uses the market to provide both incentives and rewards. The paper also identifies downsides of this patent/market system: deadweight loss and the unresponsiveness of that patent/market system to the needs of the poor. The paper then explores the social costs and …

Correlative Obligation In Patent Law: The Role Of Public Good In Defining The Limits Of Patent Exclusivity, Srividhya Ragavan

Faculty Scholarship

In light of the recent outrageous price-spiking of pharmaceuticals, this Article questions the underlying justifications for exclusive rights conferred by the grant of a patent. Traditionally, patents are defined as property rights granted to encourage desirable innovation. This definition is a misfit as treating patents as property rights does a poor job of defining the limits of the patent rights as well as the public benefit goals of the system. This misfit gradually caused an imbalance in the rights versus duties construct within patent law. After a thorough analysis of the historical and philosophical perspectives of patent exclusivity, this Article …

Corporate Power Unbound: Investorstate Arbitration Of Ip Monopolies On Medicines—Eli Lilly V. Canada And The Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement, Brook K. Baker, Katrina Geddes

Journal of Intellectual Property Law

No abstract provided.

The Health Impact Fund Proposal: Application In The United States' Era Of Comparative Effectiveness, Katherine Jeanne Racz

Journal of Intellectual Property Law

No abstract provided.

History, Trips, And Common Sense: Curbing The Counterfeit Drug Market In Sub-Saharan Africa, Hannah Elizabeth Jarrells

Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law

No abstract provided.

A Pharmaceutical Park Place: Why The Supreme Court Should Modify The Scope Of The Patent Test For Reverse Payment Deals, David Ernest Balajthy

Journal of Intellectual Property Law

No abstract provided.

Test Data Protection: Different Approaches And Implementation In Pharmaceuticals, Wael Armouti, Mohammad F. A. Nsour

Marquette Intellectual Property Law Review

None

The Myths Of Data Exclusivity, Erika Lietzan

Faculty Publications

This article contributes to an ongoing academic and public policy dialogue over whether and on what terms U.S. law should provide “data exclusivity” for new medicines. Five years after a new drug has been approved on the basis of an extensive application that may have cost more than one billion dollars to generate, federal law permits submission of a much smaller application to market a duplicate version of the drug. This second application is a different type of application, and it may cost no more than a few million dollars to prepare. A similar sequence is true for biological medicines: …

Describing Drugs: A Response To Professors Allison And Ouellette, Jacob S. Sherkow

Articles & Chapters

Profs. Allison and Ouellette’s Article, How Courts Adjudicate Patent Definiteness and Disclosure, 65 Duke L.J.609 (2015), on courts’ adjudication of certain patent disputes presents some surprising data: pharmaceutical patents litigated to judgment fare substantially worse on written-description analyses if they are not part of traditional pioneer-generic litigation. This Response engages in several hypotheses for this disparity and examines the cases that make up Allison and Ouellette’s dataset. An analysis of these cases finds that the disparity can be best explained by technological and judicial idiosyncrasies in each case, rather than larger differences among pharmaceutical patent cases. This finding contextualizes …

Empirical Evidence Of Drug Pricing Games - A Citizen's Pathway Gone Astray, Robin C. Feldman, Evan Frondorf, Andrew Cordova

Robin C Feldman

Regulatory Property: The New Ip, Robin C. Feldman

Robin C Feldman