Teva’s ‘Skinny Label’ Dispute Edges Toward Supreme Court With Government’s Backing
Executive Summary
US Solicitor General urges the Supreme Court to grant Teva's petition, arguing that the Federal Circuit was wrong in ruling that Teva's carved-out labeling for generic carvedilol induced infringement of GlaxoSmithKine's brand product.
You may also be interested in...
Supreme Court Declines ‘Skinny Label’ Case, But Teva To Continue Fight In District Court
Justice Kavanaugh voted to grant Teva’s petition for certiorari. It is unknown if other justices voted with him. The high court last month declined to hear Novartis's Gilenya patent case and Sanofi’s antitrust allegations against Mylan’s EpiPen rebate agreements.
US Supreme Court Preview: ‘Skinny’ Labels, FTC, And FCA – But No Tecfidera As Biogen Loses Bid
Teva’s carve-out fight with GSK over generic Coreg will see the Solicitor General weigh in. Amgen and Juno’s patent petitions remain pending, and the high court stays a Federal Circuit decision invalidating Novartis’ Gilenya patent.
‘Skinny Label’ Litigation: Generic Firms Rethinking Strategy, May Pursue Legislation
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.