GARY YIM / SHUTTERSTOCK.COM
In 2015 the US Federal Circuit resolved the biosimilars case of Amgen v Sandoz. But the parties did not stop there, meaning the Supreme Court could potentially review it. LSIPR looks at the consequences of a possible review.
Signed into law by the Obama administration in 2009 and part of the Affordable Care Act, the Biologics Price Competition and Innovation Act (BPCIA) introduced a biosimilars pathway to the US. The new regulatory pathway brought with it a new problem: interpretation.
Two major items of interpretation of the BPCIA were brought to a head after a claim was brought against Zarxio, the first biosimilar product approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA).
In July last year the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit sought to clarify rules on the ‘patent dance’ and the 180 days’ notice period for marketing a biosimilar in the case of Amgen v Sandoz.
You need a subscription to continue reading this content.
Start a subscription today to access the LSIPR website.
To access the full archive, digital magazines and special reports you will need to take out a paid subscription.
News stories up to a week old and feature articles on the day of publication are accessible with a BASIC FREE ACCOUNT.
Register here for free content, or subscribe for access to archive.
If you have already subscribed please login.
If you have any technical issues please email tech support.
For access to the complete website, archive, and to receive print publications, choose '12 MONTH SUBSCRIPTION'. For a free, two-week trial with full access, select ‘TWO WEEK FREE TRIAL’; and for basic access to the latest news on the website and weekly email news alerts choose the 'BASIC FREE ACCOUNT' registration.
Amgen v Sandoz, US Federal Circuit, US Supreme Court, Food and Drug Administration, biosimilar, Affordable Care Act, patent, patent dance, BPCIA,
