‘Skinny Label’ Litigation: Generic Firms Rethinking Strategy, May Pursue Legislation
Executive Summary
Generic manufacturers are being cautious on label carve-outs to avoid claims of induced infringement. Bright line rules are necessary, attorney says, and if GSK v. Teva decision is not reversed, legislation will be needed to preserve skinny label. Insurers also face potential liability for placement of skinny-label generics on formularies.
You may also be interested in...
Judge Jackson’s Patent, FDA Rulings Show She Is ‘Super Smart’ And Would Be Beneficial For Pharma
Supreme Court nominee issued three decisions on Hatch-Waxman regime as district court judge, including case in which she ruled against the FDA’s denial of orphan drug designation and another in which she deferred to the agency’s view on exclusivity. Her analysis of facts may play a role if the court takes up a case on administrative agency deference.
Generic Manufacturers Face Uphill Climb After Federal Circuit’s ‘Skinny Label’ Decision
Split appeals court denies en banc review of GSK v. Teva ruling, but suggests the district court could consider GSK’s patent declarations in determining whether Teva’s label is evidence of inducement to infringe. Teva plans to file petition for Supreme Court review.
Generic ‘Skinny Labels’ Get Reprieve As Court Agrees To Rehear Teva/GSK Case
Federal Circuit panel to reconsider whether Teva induced infringement of GSK Coreg patent despite label carve-out. Biologics and biosimilars could be particularly hurt if ruling stands given FDA’s recent guidance requiring reference to branded product.