Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 7 of 7
Full-Text Articles in Law
Suggestions For State Laws On Biosimilar Substitution, Gary M. Fox
Suggestions For State Laws On Biosimilar Substitution, Gary M. Fox
Michigan Telecommunications & Technology Law Review
Biologic drugs offer major advancements over small-molecule drugs when it comes to treating serious diseases. Biosimilars, which mimic innovative biologic drugs, have the potential to further revolutionize the practice of medicine. States now have decades of experience regulating the substitution of generic, small-molecule drugs for their brand-name equivalents. But the complexities of biologic drugs and biosimilars force states to confront novel scientific and legal issues. Many states have begun tackling those issues by passing laws that regulate when pharmacists may substitute biosimilars for their corresponding biologic drugs. Other states have yet to do so. This Note surveys five provisions common …
The Cost Of Confusion: The Paradox Of Trademarked Pharmaceuticals, Hannah Brennan
The Cost Of Confusion: The Paradox Of Trademarked Pharmaceuticals, Hannah Brennan
Michigan Telecommunications & Technology Law Review
The United States spends nearly $1,000 per person annually on drugs—forty percent more than the next highest spender, Canada, and more than twice the amount France and Germany spend. Although myriad factors contribute to high drug spending in the United States, intellectual property law plays a crucial and well-documented role in inhibiting access to cheaper, generic medications. Yet, for the most part, the discussion of the relationship between intellectual property law and drug spending has centered on patent protection. Recently, however, a few researchers have turned their attention to a different avenue of exclusivity—trademark law. New studies suggest that pharmaceutical …
Patents V. Statutory Exclusivities In Biological Pharmaceuticals - Do We Really Need Both, Yaniv Heled
Patents V. Statutory Exclusivities In Biological Pharmaceuticals - Do We Really Need Both, Yaniv Heled
Michigan Telecommunications & Technology Law Review
Over the past decade or so, the United States has been the arena of a boisterous debate regarding the creation of a new regulatory framework for the approval of generic versions of biologics-based pharmaceutical products (also known as "biological products" and "biologics")--an important and increasingly growing class of drugs. The basic purpose of such a framework is to create a fast and less-costly route to FDA approval for biologics that would be similar or identical to already-approved biological products--typically ones that are sold on the market at monopoly rates--thereby allowing cheaper versions of such medicines to enter the market. One …
Restoring The Genetic Commons: A Common Sense Approach To Biotechnology Patents In The Wake Of Ksr V. Teleflex , Anna Bartow Laakmann
Restoring The Genetic Commons: A Common Sense Approach To Biotechnology Patents In The Wake Of Ksr V. Teleflex , Anna Bartow Laakmann
Michigan Telecommunications & Technology Law Review
In this Article, I argue that a new approach to biotechnology patenting is necessary to fully realize the tremendous potential of recent advances in our understanding of the human genome. Part I places the gene patenting debate in context by highlighting the key landmarks that have shaped the biotechnology industry and outlining the products and stakeholders that comprise the industry. Part II describes the current state of the law on biotechnology patents, summarizing the Federal Circuit's application of the various doctrines that collectively define the patent landscape's parameters. In this Part, I explain how the Federal Circuit's jurisprudence is tied …
Why Pharmaceutical Firms Support Patent Trolls: The Disparate Impact Of Ebay V. Mercexchange On Innovation, Jeremiah S. Helm
Why Pharmaceutical Firms Support Patent Trolls: The Disparate Impact Of Ebay V. Mercexchange On Innovation, Jeremiah S. Helm
Michigan Telecommunications & Technology Law Review
Before the unanimous decision in eBay v. MercExchange, patent holders were almost always granted an injunction against an infringer. In fact, the Federal Circuit, in deciding eBay, noted that, upon a finding of infringement, an injunction would issue unless there were extraordinary circumstances. The Court, in a brief opinion, disagreed with the Federal Circuit and explained that the injunction issue in a patent case must be analyzed under the traditional four-factor test.[...] Is the four-factor test fairer or better than the Federal Circuit's near-automatic injunction rule? It is certainly more difficult to administer a factor test as compared to a …
Supporting Innovation In Targeted Treatments: Licenses Of Right To Nih-Funded Research Tools, Tanuja V. Garde
Supporting Innovation In Targeted Treatments: Licenses Of Right To Nih-Funded Research Tools, Tanuja V. Garde
Michigan Telecommunications & Technology Law Review
Support for new drug development has taken some interesting turns in current patent law jurisprudence. Beginning with the severe curtailment of scope of the common law experimental use doctrine in Madey v. Duke University, and culminating with the recent Supreme Court decision in Merck KGaA v. Integra Lifesciences I, Ltd., broadening the scope of the statutory research exemption, the freedom to conduct experimental research using another's patented inventions becomes dependent in part on the purpose of the research. That the patent at issue in Merck was characterized by the Federal Circuit as being directed to a research tool raised the …
The Experimental Purpose Doctrine And Biomedical Research, Tao Huang
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 …