Skip to content

Menu

LexBlog, Inc. logo
NetworkSub-MenuBrowse by SubjectBrowse by PublisherJoin the NetworkGet StartedSubscribeSupportContact
Search
Close

Supreme Court Decision Allows Faster Marketing of Biosimilars

By Pamela Del Negro on June 29, 2017
Email this postTweet this postLike this postShare this post on LinkedIn

On Monday, June 12, 2017, the United States Supreme Court in a unanimous decision held that manufacturers making biosimilars of biologic drugs did not have to wait until after gaining federal approval of the biosimilar to notify the manufacturer of biologic reference products (Sponsor) that they intend to commercially market a biosimilar drug. The Court’s decision addresses two cases in the same opinion: Sandoz v. Amgen and Amgen v. Sandoz. 

The cases involve the Biologics Price Competition and Innovation Act of 2009 (the Act). The Act created an abbreviated path to Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval for “biosimilars” – products that are “highly similar” biological products previously approved by the FDA.  In pertinent part, the Act states that biosimilar manufacturers must provide at least 180 days’ notice to the Sponsors manufacturing the corresponding biologic before commercially marketing a biosimilar. The Act also established a process for resolving patent disputes between manufacturer of biologics and biosimilars.

One question before the Court was whether the biosimilar manufacturer can provide the marketing notice before the biosimilar receives FDA approval, or whether it must delay notification until after its receives FDA approval.  Justice Clarence Thomas, delivering the opinion of the Court, stated that the biosimilar manufacturer may provide notice before receiving FDA approval.  The decision states that the Act “contains a single timing requirement: The applicant must provide notice at least 180 days prior to marketing its biosimilar.”  The Supreme Court’s ruling reversed a Federal Circuit Court of Appeals decision, which held that notice could not take place until after the biosimilar received FDA approval . The ruling also vacated and remanded a second issue regarding whether certain requirements in the patent infringement review sections of the Act can be enforced by an injunction.  The case also leaves open questions under California’s unfair competition law.

Photo of Pamela Del Negro Pamela Del Negro

Pamela H. Del Negro is a member of Robinson+Cole’s Health Law Group, where she advises institutional providers, including hospitals and ambulatory surgery centers, as well as physician practice groups, community providers, and other health care entities on health care issues and general corporate…

Pamela H. Del Negro is a member of Robinson+Cole’s Health Law Group, where she advises institutional providers, including hospitals and ambulatory surgery centers, as well as physician practice groups, community providers, and other health care entities on health care issues and general corporate matters. She provides legal counsel on a full range of transactional and regulatory health law issues, including co-management arrangements; compliance plans; the acquisition and merger of medical entities; Medicare and Medicaid fraud and abuse and the Stark law; hospital affiliations; the privacy and security of personal health information; corporate governance; private placements; and contracting. She also works with clients on managed care contracting, the corporate practice of medicine issues, clinical integration and antitrust issues, and the structuring and acquisition of electronic health records technology, including the negotiation and documentation of software agreements. Read her full rc.com bio here.

Read more about Pamela Del NegroEmail
Show more Show less
  • Posted in:
    Health Care and Life Sciences
  • Blog:
    Health Law Diagnosis
  • Organization:
    Robinson & Cole LLP
  • Article: View Original Source

Call us at 1-800-913-0988 or email sales@lexblog.com.

Facebook LinkedIn Twitter RSS
The Library at LexBlog
  • About LexBlog
  • The Field We Built
  • Library at LexBlog
  • Our Beliefs
  • Our Team
  • Contact LexBlog
  • Disclaimer
  • Editorial Policy
  • Terms of Service
  • Get Started
  • Publishing Solutions
  • Compass
  • Submit a Request
  • Support Center
  • System Status
Copyright © 2026, LexBlog, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Law blog design & platform by LexBlog LexBlog Logo