FTC Challenges More Than 100 Patents as Improperly Listed in the FDA’s Orange Book
Today, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) challenged more than 100 patents held by manufacturers of brand-name asthma inhalers, epinephrine autoinjectors, and other drug products as improperly or i
“Wrongfully listed patents can significantly drive up the prices Americans must pay for medicines and drug products while undermining fair and honest competition,” said FTC Chair Lina M. Khan. “The FTC’s action today identifies over 100 patents that we believe are improperly listed, affecting products ranging from inhalers to EpiPens. We will continue to use all our tools to protect Americans from illegal business tactics that are hiking the cost of drugs and drug products.”
When the listing of a drug substance or drug product patent is disputed consistent with the applicable FDA regulations FDA will send the statement of dispute to the New Drug Application (NDA) holder who will then have 30 days to withdraw or amend these listings, or certify under penalty of perjury that the listings comply with applicable statutory and regulatory requirements.
Last month, the FTC issued a policy statement that warned that the agency would be scrutinizing the improper submission of patents for listing in the Orange Book. The Commission said improper listings in the Orange Book may harm competition from cheaper generic alternatives and keep brand prices artificially high.
%2Fcdn.vox-cdn.com%2Fuploads%2Fchorus_asset%2Ffile%2F24924651%2F236780_Google_AntiTrust_Trial_Custom_Art_CVirginia__0001_3.png?width=92&height=&ar=&mode=&format=avif&dpr=2)
The Evidence Google's Systematic Theft is Anti-Competitive
Image via CrunchBase Systematic theft may be the most anti-competitive and monopolistic practice in which a company can engage. Systematic theft generates an unbeatable cost advantage by avoiding the standard cost of propertied goods for which law-abiding competitors must pay. It creates an unfair, jump-the-gun, time-to-market advantage, by ignoring the rule [...]
Big Tech Has a Patent Violation Problem
In the U.S., large tech companies regularly infringe on smaller companies’ intellectual property (IP). Often, this has led to large court settlements that punish larger companies. But, this enforcement mechanism has been weakened. In 2011, Congress created a tribunal within the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office called the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB), which has created a new avenue for major tech companies to challenge IP protections. New legislation would further enable this attack on IP protections, and ultimately harm the U.S. economy as a whole.
How Google and Big Tech Killed the U.S. Patent System - IPWatchdog.com | Patents & Intellectual Property Law
In a Banana Republic the Elites rule over a servile government that abets and supports, for kickbacks and bribes, the exploitation of the rest of society. Instead of Dole and United Fruit controlling Honduras, we now have Apple, Microsoft, Amazon, Google and other tech giants controlling Congress and the Executive...
The Great Escape: Efficient Infringers Increasingly Seek to Abuse Antitrust Law
Last week the Federal Circuit issued an important decision that might be easy to overlook. In Intellectual Ventures I LLC v. Capital One Financial Corporation, the Federal Circuit dodged the antitrust question presented by finding that a prior ruling had collateral estoppel effect.
Explaining Efficient Infringement
By Adam Mossoff & Bhamati Viswanathan
In a recent New York Times op-ed, “The Patent Troll Smokescreen,” Joe Nocera used in print for the first time the term, “efficient infringement.” This pithy phrase quickly gained currency if only because it captures a well-known phenomenon that has been i
Hon. Paul R. Michel - IPWatchdog.com | Patents & Intellectual Property Law
if (typeof window.atnt !== 'undefined') { window.atnt(); }if (typeof window.atnt !== 'undefined') { window.atnt(); }The Honorable Paul Redmond Michel was appointed to the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in March of 1988 by President Ronald Reagan. On December 25, 2004, he assumed the duties of Chief Judge. After his elevation to Chief Judge, he served as one of 27 judges on the Judicial Conference of the United States, the governing body of…if (typeof window.atnt !== 'undefined') { window.atnt(); }if (typeof window.atnt !== 'undefined') { window.atnt(); }
How Google and Big Tech Killed the U.S. Patent System - IPWatchdog.com | Patents & Patent Law
In a Banana Republic the Elites rule over a servile government that abets and supports, for kickbacks and bribes, the exploitation of the rest of society. Instead of Dole and United Fruit controlling Honduras, we now have Apple, Microsoft, Amazon, Google and other tech giants controlling Congress and the Executive...
How does Intel’s antitrust lawsuit against Fortress change the patent narrative? — Markman Advisors
Intel’s lawsuit takes aim at a new aspect of PAEs. That aspect is patent aggregation. Intel and Apple, two big-tech companies, are seeking a court ruling that would essentially hold that the very act of aggregating patents can give rise to antitrust violations. The implications of that could redound